Build Civic Tech

There is an urgent need to strengthen civic knowledge, skills, and engagement across all ages, including adults. This includes those who study and work in STEM fields. Technology plays an increasingly central role in our lives and society, in ways that are both constructive and destructive. Tech innovators must understand the concept of civic responsibility inherent in “we the people,” and think critically about the impact of the work they do. At the same time, we need to inspire tech and science experts to help ensure that decisions by government, at all levels and across all three branches, are informed.

This report focuses on the integration of civic knowledge and responsibility into STEM education and careers, and how individuals in STEM fields can and must hold institutions accountable and move us toward a more perfect union. Reinvigorating civics knowledge and civic skills has become a national and economic security imperative. The urgency requires reaching not just K-12 students but also adults. This report also offers actionable recommendations for businesses and government, and other organizations committed to equipping employees, partners, and associates with essential civic knowledge and skills.

Introduction

Compared to any other period of human history, the pace of technological advancement over the last few decades is unmatched. The era we currently find ourselves in is marked by exponential growth in areas such as biotechnology, the internet, data analytics, quantum computing, machine learning, and artificial intelligence (AI). Each of these holds the power to change the world completely, for better or for worse.

Humanity and technology are inextricably linked. The 2023 National Cyber Workforce and Education Strategy aptly states, “technology itself does not have a value system; rather, it carries the values of its owners and operators.”

The release of AI technology widely available to the public has highlighted that today’s technology can be used both as a tool and as a weapon. It is vital to encourage developments that promote innovation while intentionally maximizing the potential for technologies to be used in positive ways. Foundational to this goal is the need to strengthen civic responsibility, respect for the rule of law, and an understanding of the role of government — and, most importantly, the role of citizens — in a healthy democracy. That is the function of civics education.

CivxNow defines civics as “the lifelong process that makes people into informed and engaged members of their communities — which range from schools and towns or neighborhoods to the whole nation and even the world.” Today, civics education is crucial for understanding and addressing the broader implications of technology. It must be provided at all education levels — K–12, colleges and universities, and even for adults. Strengthening civic knowledge and skills can help build system and societal resilience against tech-enabled threats, actively counter divisiveness and cynicism in society by reinvigorating shared aspirations and empowering citizens, and even strengthen workforce cohesion. Beyond that, incorporating civics concepts into science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education and the technology sector can better position our democracy to benefit from all that technology offers.

Today, civics education is crucial for understanding and addressing the broader implications of technology. It must be provided at all education levels — K–12, colleges and universities, and even for adults.

This is the goal of the Defending Democratic Institutions (DDI) project’s Civics in STEM initiative. As part of this effort, DDI has already hosted two private roundtables — on June 17 and July 23, 2024 — bringing together distinguished leaders from the private sector, government, and academia. These discussions explored why incorporating civics education into STEM is critical for society, as well as the challenges and strategies associated with promoting civics within the technology sector.

By embedding civics education into STEM curricula, we help ensure that future innovators are not only skilled in their technical disciplines but also equipped with the knowledge and values necessary to contribute to a just, inclusive, and democratic society. This integration bridges the gap between technical expertise and policy, helping to ensure that the innovations of tomorrow are guided by principles and policies that strengthen democracy and uphold ethical standards.

Background

The unparalleled pace of technological advancements in recent history has often caught us off guard, leading to a growing recognition of the need to include ethical and policy considerations alongside technological innovation.

Rapid technological development has significantly impacted U.S. democracy in both positive and negative ways. Technology has enabled increased voter engagement, enhanced transparency, efficient communication, and the rapid dissemination of information. Yet, it has also contributed to a growing digital divide, rampant misinformation and disinformation, and mounting cybersecurity threats.

At the societal level, the internet has enabled unprecedented connectivity, yet it has also contributed to a disconnect between the individual and their respective communities. Social media has empowered civil society and historically marginalized groups, revolutionizing social movements and increasing accessibility to information. However, it has helped enable the rise of tribalism and deepened polarization. Similarly, while there will be many benefits from embedding AI into our daily lives, we must remain aware of both the visible and unforeseen implications, which may carry significant consequences.

“Cyberspace is composed of not only technology and protocols but also people. People are an integral part of cyberspace, both in creating and using it. In less than a generation, technology has transformed our daily lives …. We rely on [it] for our national security, economic development, and innovation. More than any other domain — air, space, sea, or land — people conceived of and created cyberspace and will continue to improve it.”

Kemba Walden, Former National Cyber Director

Given the double-edged nature of technological innovation, it is important to incorporate civics education to ensure that technology’s impact on society is understood and responsibly managed. Over the past several years, there has been a growing emphasis on including ethics in STEM education. (See, e.g., the work of roundtable participants listed in Appendix A.) Civics, particularly the concept of civic responsibility, can provide an important “why” to that ethics discussion. Democracy only works if individuals understand their obligations as part of “we the people.”

Civic knowledge and skills should not be limited to students interested in the social sciences; they should be considered essential for those working in the technology sector. Integrating key civics concepts, such as civic responsibility, into STEM education and the tech sector can challenge students and professionals alike to think critically about their responsibilities regarding the work they either hope to do or are already doing. Hopefully, this will inspire them to contribute constructively to their workplaces, communities, nation, and world.

Integrating key civics concepts, such as civic responsibility, into STEM education and the tech sector can challenge students and professionals alike to think critically about their responsibilities regarding the work they either hope to do or are already doing.

Having individuals who are both tech savvy and policy sensitive is a prerequisite for developing effective laws, policies, and norms to guide our democracy in an increasingly tech-driven world. Bringing civics concepts into STEM training can help drive more informed policies around the development and use of technology by building a pipeline of technology-oriented individuals interested in public service, the military, and even private sector work that provides a sense of mission.

“Inspired to Serve,” the report of the National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, made reinvigorating civics its number one recommendation for inspiring young people to serve:

Widespread and effective civic education is an essential requirement for fostering a culture of service in which Americans can identify how their own strengths, skills, and interests could contribute to the public good by addressing needs in their communities and Nation. When 22 percent of American adults cannot name any of the three branches of government, it is well past time for the country to take action.

STEM education has rightly been viewed over the last several decades as a national security imperative. Yet, teaching civics is also a national security imperative. Integrating civics concepts into STEM is critical as society and technology continue to evolve together. The last several decades have seen a decline in civics education that has left too many without a clear understanding of the importance of democracy, the rule of law, or their role in it. This gap exists beyond STEM fields but is particularly consequential for individuals who will help shape innovation moving forward.

The future of technology will play a pivotal role in determining whether societies evolve toward greater democracy or slide into authoritarianism. Take AI as an example. AI has the potential to enhance democratic processes by enabling more efficient governance, increasing transparency, and empowering citizens through better access to information. Yet, if AI is left unchecked or misused, it could easily concentrate power in the hands of a few, enabling surveillance, manipulation, and control on an unprecedented scale.

An expert in one of our roundtable discussions highlighted the importance of securing market democracy, warning that without public action, big data and AI could lead to a drift toward “totalitarian surveillance [and] oppression.” If the public does not actively shape industrial and government policy “toward [ensuring] diversity, competition, and every individual having a voice,” the system risks tilting in the opposite direction, following the models of Russia and China. Technological advances could instead be used for surveillance, censorship, and repression. China is already exporting this model globally through its Belt and Road Initiative. Its recent sale of Huawei surveillance equipment to Uganda’s military regime is an example of moving a nation toward a surveillance society. The governance structures we establish today will be critical in ensuring that technology serves as a force for democratic empowerment rather than a tool for authoritarian control.

AI is already being used to refine social media and content algorithms, keeping users engaged in a continuous stream of personalized content. While this may not always be harmful, increasingly personalized feeds can lead to more segmented thinking, the extremization of opinions, and, in some cases, heightened polarization that could escalate into violence. Furthermore, according to Harvard Business Review, AI has the potential to exacerbate existing biases in data, including those against minorities. A 2024 National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine study on facial recognition points out multiple examples of where the systems have misidentified innocent Black Americans, causing them to be arrested. Further, a criminal justice algorithm used in Broward County, Florida, was found to be twice as likely to mislabel African American defendants as “high risk” compared to White defendants.

Our choices now — both at home and as a global society — will influence whether AI becomes a catalyst for a more open, participatory society or a mechanism for exacerbating injustice and reinforcing autocratic regimes. Understanding the role of governance and governance structures is crucial, as these structures, institutions, and processes will have a huge impact on the outcomes.

“We can look at what is happening to society as a result of innovation, and right now, around the AI conversations, there is a sense of we should build what we can, not what we should.… You can’t put the genie back in the bottle, but you can help people holding the bottle understand what the implications may be. The important question to address is: How do we empower people to better understand what the implications are and what role they can play?”

Jen Ellis, Founder, NextJenSecurity

How Did We Get Here?

The launch of Sputnik by the Soviet Union in 1957 had a profound impact on the United States, particularly on its education system, leading to a dramatic shift toward STEM education. The shock of Sputnik created a sense of urgency, motivating policymakers, educators, and students to prioritize STEM. Numerous public awareness campaigns highlighted the importance of scientific achievement and encouraged a generation of young people to pursue careers in STEM.

In 1958, Congress passed the National Defense Education Act, providing substantial federal funding for STEM education. The act aimed to produce more scientists, engineers, and mathematicians to help the United States maintain its technological superiority and enhance national security. On May 10, 1950, U.S. president Harry S. Truman signed the National Science Foundation Act, creating the first federal agency dedicated to supporting education and fundamental research across all scientific disciplines. Since this pivot, the U.S. education system has undergone significant curriculum reforms to emphasize STEM subjects and create a more technically skilled and scientifically literate workforce.

These curriculum reforms extended beyond K–12 and into higher education. The launch of Sputnik led to increased support for higher education institutions in the form of funding for research and development programs in STEM fields, leading to the expansion of graduate programs and the establishment of new research facilities.

The focus on STEM education had several implications for civics education in the United States, as the Sputnik-induced shift initially diverted attention and, ultimately, resources from it. As noted in a 2020 commentary, in the decades following Sputnik’s launch, the desire to maintain superiority in STEM-related fields remained a priority as the world grew more connected and complex. Over time, this resulted in less class time and fewer resources available for civics education.

Other factors have likely contributed to this dynamic. For instance, STEM metrics and outcomes can be easily and uniformly tracked across different countries, reinforcing and intensifying competition between nations. Moreover, civics education is sometimes viewed as a subjective, politically sensitive area of study. It is also difficult for the general public to conceptualize, internalize, and actively prioritize the importance of a good civics education, which means there is less public pressure for it. In comparison, STEM fields appear straightforward, apolitical, and noncontroversial.

In recent decades, the difference in career paths and salaries in STEM versus non-STEM fields has substantially changed. When high school students and college freshmen consider their career paths, STEM fields often offer a clearer sense of direction — leading to roles like doctors and software engineers — frequently with attractive salaries. In contrast, the career path in civics is less defined, though equally important, which may partly explain the increasing preference for STEM among younger generations.

The Current State of Play in Civics Education

The last several decades have seen a drastic decline in civics education in the United States, which has left too many without a clear understanding of the importance of democracy or their role in it. A report by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation found that “more than 70% of Americans fail a basic civics literacy quiz on topics like the three branches of government, the number of Supreme Court justices, and other basic functions of our democracy.” According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), in 2022, 22 percent of eighth-graders “scored at or above the NAEP Proficient level in civics.” The 2023 Annenberg Civics Knowledge Survey also found that many adults did not know what rights the First Amendment protected, and only 65 percent of respondents could name the three branches of government.

Funding for civics remains an ongoing issue. Federal funding for K–12 STEM education is roughly $50 per student, while funding for civics is closer to 50 cents. The lack of funding and attention paid to the humanities affects higher education as well. Facing budget constraints, many public universities target humanities and liberal arts programs first in their attempts to balance their budgets. At private universities, prestige and lack of tangible vocational benefits seem to have played a role in this trend. Other factors also contribute to this trend, such as the perceived value of a humanities-centered education and job prospects after graduation. This trend transcends borders. According to Ben Goldstein, “humanities and social science fields without a clear pre-professional connection — disciplines classifiable as ‘qualitative academia’ — have been falling out of favor worldwide. Between 2015 and 2018, the share of bachelors, masters, and doctoral degrees awarded in humanities fields fell 5%, 11%, and 9% respectively on average throughout the OECD, with drops of varying proportions detected in 24 of the 36 OECD countries.”

Funding for civics remains an ongoing issue. Federal funding for K–12 STEM education is roughly $50 per student, while funding for civics is closer to 50 cents.

The decline of civics education is matched by a decline of trust in U.S. democracy and democratic institutions, such as the U.S. Congress and the justice system. A 2024 Gallup poll found that only 28 percent of U.S. adults are “satisfied” with how democracy is working in the United States — a new 40-year low. A similar poll found that only 9 percent of U.S. adults have a “great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in the U.S. Congress and 30 percent have a “great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in the U.S. Supreme Court. Similarly, the 2022 Annenberg Civics Knowledge Survey found that nearly 7 in 10 people (67 percent) agreed with the statement that the Supreme Court “gets too messed up in politics,” an increase of 12 percent since 2019. In 2024, another poll found that “7 in 10 Americans think the high court’s justices are more influenced by ideology.” This perspective is not limited to the highest courts. For example, a 2023 survey by the National Center for State Courts found that 61 percent of respondents believed state courts are “political.”

Meeting an Urgent Need — Civics for Adults

Democracy depends on informed and engaged citizens. Americans today live in one of the most polarized eras in our nation’s history, a pattern that continues to grow exponentially due to information operations by foreign adversaries, declining trust in our democratic institutions, and a lack of civic understanding of how to engage effectively with our democracy. With civics education having been underresourced and undervalued for decades, we now see a resulting lack of civic knowledge and skills that has left many adults ill equipped to fulfill their essential roles within our democracy.

K–12 and higher education reform are critical to rebuilding a foundation of civics knowledge but require significant time to implement before we see results. Given the urgency of the issues, we cannot wait for this long-term investment. There is an immediate need to remedy the current civics knowledge gap among adults.

Empowering adults with civics knowledge can strengthen democratic participation and counter the growing influence of misinformation, enabling a more resilient and informed electorate. In the technology sector, where professionals are shaping the digital infrastructure of society, understanding the values and aspirations of democracy and the responsibility of individuals in a democracy is even more crucial.

In May 2022, CSIS launched its Civics at Work (CaW) initiative, a partnership with leading civics groups, national security practitioners, and business leaders looking to reinvigorate civics literacy as a national and economic security imperative, both through their respective workforces and in their larger communities. Business leaders, in particular, are optimally positioned to take on this role. As leaders, employers, community members, and patriots, businesses must be at the heart of any effort to reinvigorate the public’s civics awareness and engagement. Commerce, innovation, and U.S. competitiveness all depend on a healthy democracy and continuing commitment to the rule of law. Civics literacy is a fundamental part of a successful and thriving community, and businesses have a unique ability to contribute by investing in their workforces. Furthermore, a Harvard Business Review paper notes that free markets rely on free and stable political systems to thrive, which can be reinforced through stronger civics education.

Importantly, because people today trust their employers more than the government or the media, companies remain one of the few institutions with broad public support and are equipped with the “resources, political power, incentives, and responsibility” to help protect democracy. In another Harvard Business Review white paper, BET Networks president Scott Mills notes that companies also recognize the need to foster environments where employees from diverse backgrounds can collaborate and communicate effectively. As such, skills such as strong collaboration, clear and regular communication, compromise, and mutual respect — areas that can be strengthened by increasing civic skills such as civil discourse and renewing a sense of shared aspirations — are crucial for creating these successful business environments.

The private sector plays a critical role in its ability to leverage investment for good — directing financial resources toward initiatives that not only generate profits but also contribute to society. This approach aligns with global policies aimed at mitigating risks associated with new and emerging technologies while also addressing the need to move from a first-to-market mentality to a best-to-market imperative. In this context, the business case for promoting civics education has never been stronger or more critical.

“Teaching the discipline of law to those seeking technical graduate degrees in cybersecurity has been highly rewarding. The students are usually intimidated to begin the class but then embrace the study as they begin to understand the “system” of the rule of law in our country - the Separation of Powers; the role of courts; the distinction between legislation and regulation; etc. I am convinced that we can and must cultivate a commitment within science and technology communities to understand the rule of law, to embrace it, to defend it and proselytize about it.”

Dan Sutherland, Professor of Cybersecurity Law and Policy, George Washington University

As part of CaW, DDI developed Civics for Adults: An Implementation Guide for Businesses, Civics for Adults: A Guide for Civics Content Providers, and hosted discussions on how civics can promote the role of businesses in U.S. democracy. The first business leader to sign up to participate in CSIS’s CaW was Brad Smith, president of Microsoft. During a January 2021 CSIS program on the importance of equipping STEM students with civics education, Smith said:

Technology has become a multidisciplinary activity and every engineer at a company like Microsoft needs a bigger dose of the liberal arts and civics in particular … and what is true at a place like Microsoft is true across the tech sector …. At the end of the day, the heart of our society is our democratic foundation and therefore civics education always has to be at the heart of this multidisciplinary approach.

Ongoing Challenges

Incorporating civics concepts into the STEM and tech worlds faces several ongoing challenges, primarily stemming from a disconnect between scientific and policy communities. Yet, a grasp of how our system works is essential for those entering technology and science-oriented fields; governmental decisions not only directly influence innovation and discovery, but, perhaps even more importantly, directly affect implementation. Teaching scientists and engineers that considering social impact and learning about taking a scientific or engineering concept from idea to use requires understanding — and, quite possibly, acting within a civics context — in order to achieve success; this should be an important aspect of science and engineering education.

Bridging the gap between “techies” and policymakers is difficult, as it entails encouraging technologists to navigate the nuanced “gray areas” of societal and policy issues, as well as the equally challenging task of teaching policy professionals that there can be clear right and wrong answers in technical realms. Failure to do so means failed public policy due to a mismatch between legislators and regulators intents and what is technically feasible. It also means failure of scientists and engineers to take into account societal issues as they design the technology. Teaching the two communities to be speak a common language is thus really important for society’s health and wellbeing.

For example, a potential use case could be the accreditation requirements of the British Computer Society (BCS) in the United Kingdom. Founded in 1957, BCS is a charity dedicated to “[raising] standards of competence and conduct across the IT industry.” To achieve this, BCS provides a wide range of accreditation, qualification, and certification services for IT professionals, higher education programs, and at-home education. Due to its international recognition, BCS accreditations and qualifications are highly sought after by employers in the IT sector and academic programs.

To obtain official BCS accreditation, programs and courses must satisfy BCS’s “Criteria for Accreditation.” One such criterion is “the ability to [recognize] the legal, social, ethical and professional issues involved in the exploitation of computer technology and be guided by the adoption of appropriate professional, ethical and legal practices.”

The BCS use case has been studied to assess its effectiveness in implementing a nationwide ethics requirement in educational curricula. A study by Tom McEwan and Sandra Cairncross from Edinburgh Napier University notes some challenges in implementing BCS’s Legal, Social, Ethical and Professional Issues (LSEPIs) criteria in higher education. In their paper, the authors observed that “technically-oriented undergraduate students are often reluctant to engage with [BCS’s] ‘Legal, Social, Ethical and Professional Issues (LSEPI).’” They further noted that, after a decade of increasingly relaxed social and ethical standards in certain media, such as widespread illegal downloading of music, video, and software, many current UK undergraduates “appear to have an increasingly cavalier attitude to intellectual property in digital media” despite receiving BCS training.

While this is just one paper examining the efficacy of BCS’s LSEPI requirements, it presents a mixed picture. The requirements are well intentioned and capable of being implemented on a national scale, but they still encounter many of the same challenges faced by traditional general education and undergraduate requirements in the United Kingdom. Fundamentally, the results may point toward the importance of instilling a sense of civic responsibility to help explain why students should care about ethics.

Another challenge lies in educating teachers on how to integrate civics into STEM curricula. Education schools are not adequately preparing teachers to teach civics, let alone equipping STEM teachers to integrate civics concepts into their lessons. Political polarization exacerbates the challenge. For example, a study by Daniela Kruel DiGiacomo et al. found that only 28 percent of teachers believe parents would support them teaching about contemporary elections, even though 81 percent report that doing so would help meet state curriculum standards. This impacts both the content teachers feel comfortable covering and the overall quality of civics education students receive. Additionally, the same study found that schools lack training for teachers on handling polarization, largely due to insufficient administrative support. As a result, 92 percent of teachers said they will “shut down” student discussions on contentious topics to avoid partisan conflicts, rather than encouraging constructive dialogue and working on civil discourse.

Moreover, an expert in one of our roundtable discussions noted the ongoing challenge of engaging some first-generation students, and other minorities that are underrepresented in STEM fields, with civics because they often feel disenfranchised by the very system we ask them to study and value. A potential solution could be to emphasize that civics can empower them to become effective agents of change, helping to dismantle barriers and injustices that prevent more students from advancing in STEM careers.

Moreover, the binary thinking often characteristic of STEM fields — and the focus on solving technical problems — leads many to avoid political discourse and civic engagement, mistakenly believing it doesn’t apply to them. Many in the field are drawn to STEM subjects precisely to avoid the messiness of civil society, preferring a world seen through the binary lens of 0s and 1s. Teaching STEM students that it is not only acceptable to engage in discussions that involve ethics and values, but that it is in fact necessary and valuable in developing acceptable technical solutions to societal problems, is thus critical.

Understanding the variety of motivations of tech professionals is important. An expert in one of our roundtable discussions described the four Ps of motivation guiding people in the field: protection, prestige, patriotism, and puzzle-solving. The challenge — and the opportunity — lies in finding the commonality between those motivations and being civically literate.

Finally, incentives within the business world are not always in sync with broader societal good. While corporate responsibilities lie with shareholders and employees, the right decision for business is not always seen as aligned with what’s best for society. Framing democracy as a business asset is a critical step in aligning private sector incentives with public good. Although the tension between societal good and corporate responsibilities is an issue that we will continue to grapple with, there are numerous cases in which the private sector leverages its influence to safeguard democracy and incentivize civic-minded investment. These companies recognize the importance of civics education as a business imperative and have incorporated it into their programs, demonstrating the societal impact of technology and its alignment with democratic principles.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Democracy is neither invincible nor inevitable. It can only be sustained by a civically informed and engaged citizenry that comes together with a common purpose. However, this fundamental prerequisite is threatened by the decades-long decline in civics education, which has left Americans lacking the skills to fulfill their essential role in moving us toward a more perfect union.

As we move to reinvigorate civics education, we cannot afford to leave anyone behind. We cannot settle for reaching only those who are already interested in government and the role of the individual in a democracy. We must find ways to also engage those whose interests lie in more technological and scientific fields. And we must reach adults as well as students.

The challenges we face today — polarization, misinformation, and a lack of trust in our institutions — underscore the urgent need for a reinvigorated focus on civics education. As democracy’s survival hinges upon informed participation, it is essential that education systems empower citizens to understand their role in shaping our more perfect union. Nowhere is this more important than in the STEM and tech world. Science and technology have an undisputed influence on society, and the decisions made by tech professionals shape not only the future of innovation but also the fabric of society and its democratic institutions.

Infusing civics concepts into STEM education can ensure that the next generation of technologists understands that they have a civic responsibility to think about the societal impact of their innovations. This interdisciplinary approach is key to preparing a workforce that is technically skilled and civically engaged, including engagement in the development of norms, policies, and laws.

Integrating civics concepts into the STEM and tech world is not just an educational priority — it is a democratic imperative. As technology continues to shape the world, those at the forefront of innovation must be equipped with the civic knowledge and ethical grounding to guide their work responsibly. And those making governance decisions must be equally prepared to meet the demands of a complex and technological future.

Integrating civics concepts into the STEM and tech world is not just an educational priority — it is a democratic imperative.

HOW DO WE INTEREST STEM STUDENTS AND TECH WORKERS IN CIVICS?

Reveal Impact: Herbert Lin, a fellow in cyber policy at Stanford University, often tells his students that it behooves them to understand how government works because it is government that effectively dictates what we can know and understand about the universe, primarily through decisions about how to allocate its massive funding. AI and cybersecurity are good examples of how governments are developing rules, regulations, and policies that will impact the development and deployment of technology. But technical experts are not just impacted — they can and should also have an impact. They are members of society with valuable experience and skills to bring to societal problems, and thus they should participate in the discussions both as experts and as members of society.

Elevate the Role of Translators Between STEM and Policy: There is a critical need for individuals who can bridge the gap between STEM and policy by getting involved in the process and acting as “translators.” These professionals must understand both technical concepts and policy implications, enabling them to communicate effectively between the two communities. Teaching policymakers the technical aspect of emerging technologies, while helping technologists navigate the complexities of policy, is essential for fostering collaboration and innovation. To strengthen this vital role, we must create programs and positions that elevate these “translators” by raising awareness of their importance, making these roles more prestigious, and incentivizing individuals to pursue them. By recognizing and investing in these positions, we can ensure that the intersection of technology and policy is more effectively navigated, driving ethical innovation and informed decisionmaking. There are several examples of Master of Science (MS) degrees in tech and public policy, but there is still room for more. In the field of cybersecurity, Tufts University offers a degree in Cybersecurity and Public Policy and the University of Texas at Austin offers a Master of Public Affairs (MPAff ) dual degree program between its Cockrell School of Engineering and its Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs.

Connect to the Scientific Revolution and the Age of Enlightenment: STEM students may be interested in the connections between the Scientific Revolution, with its questioning of established concepts and structures, and its influence on the Age of Enlightenment, which in turn informed the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, with the framers developing our radical system of government in the same breath, and in much the same way, that a new world of scientific discovery and understanding was helping inform new ways of thinking. The framers did not see a bright distinction between what today we might call “hard science” and “soft science.”

Bridge the Gap between Binary and Shades of Gray: We must explore how the mathematical and scientific principles and “answers” that seem so black and white today actually arrived through a process — a process of discernment and discovery that did not always yield societal acceptance at first. Similarly, the framers of the Constitution set up not just institutions but a process for arriving at the “right” answer for the advancement of individuals, society, and the nation. And just as science is constantly raising new questions about long-held answers or assumptions about the universe, democracy is always moving toward a more perfect union, with change coming about through the work of informed and engaged citizens.

Leverage the Scientific Method to Strengthen Civic Engagement: The principles of the scientific method — critical thinking, evidence-based reasoning, and an iterative approach to problem-solving — offer a powerful framework for enhancing civic engagement. By teaching students to apply the scientific method to democratic participation, we can cultivate a more informed and thoughtful citizenry. Encouraging students to evaluate information with the same rigor they would in a scientific setting allows them to engage in civil discourse and embrace differing perspectives. This connection between scientific inquiry and the democratic process helps foster collaboration and critical thinking, empowering students who are driven to solve problems to apply their skills to civic challenges. Embedding these principles into civics education not only reinforces a sense of civic responsibility but also ensures that the next generation is equipped to address complex societal issues with thoughtful, evidence-based approaches.

WHAT ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT CIVICS CONCEPTS TO CONVEY?

CSIS’s Civics for Adults

Developed in partnership with the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, CSIS’s Civics for Adults guide aims to help civics experts and content providers create resources for business, government, and higher education leaders. The goal is to enhance civic understanding among adults and improve the functioning of democratic institutions within communities by identifying existing resources suitable for adults and adapting civics materials originally designed for schools.

First, the guide emphasizes that civic knowledge alone is insufficient; it must be paired with civic skills that can produce positive outcomes for both institutions and communities. Second, it offers actionable guidance on developing civics content for adults, ensuring they grasp the importance of the federal system, the roles of each branch of government, the separation of powers, the rule of law, and civilian control of the armed forces. Additionally, it highlights the importance of promoting civic engagement and fostering a sense of civic responsibility in learners. Only when individuals take ownership of their work and are invested in the success of their institutions and communities can they consistently make decisions that contribute to the long-term health of democracy.

The guide also provides advice on how to effectively tailor civics to adults, noting that adults are typically self-directed learners who engage more with content when it has immediate relevance to their lives or careers. It emphasizes that materials should include narratives that resonate with adults’ work experiences and lived realities, sparking discussions about both the strengths and shortcomings of current systems. Further, employers should focus on implementing achievable civics goals, such as encouraging employees to vote or compensating them for jury duty or community service.

Lastly, the guide stresses that outreach should not be limited to large corporations or government institutions. Equal attention should be given to local chambers of commerce, small businesses, community colleges, and trade schools. While concise, this guide serves as a practical starting point for content creators developing or adapting civics resources to engage adults in both their workplaces and communities.

CSIS’s Civics for Adults guide discusses the key civics concepts all Americans should understand (see box above).

Of particular importance in the technology arena is an understanding of civic responsibility — obligations that go beyond oneself and are essential for a functioning democracy based on the then-radical idea of self-governance. Civic responsibility can help inform the “why” of ethics. It can also strengthen the message that security, particularly cybersecurity, is a shared responsibility between the government and the individual.

Also important, as noted, is an understanding of how policy decisions are made and at what level(s) of government. Major funding decisions are generally made by the U.S. Congress and the executive branch, but state and local governments can also impact the level of resources available for the development of technology or new engineering projects, for example. Similarly, policies and laws establishing limits or guidelines for scientific or technological research could come from federal, state, or even local governments. Understanding our system of federalism is important for understanding how to bring about change or influence outcomes.

Finally, reinforcing a sense of shared values and aspirations captured in the notion of a more perfect union, for which we must always strive, can help strengthen the commitment to using STEM-related expertise to reinforce, rather than undermine, those values.

HOW DO WE GET CIVICS CONCEPTS INTO THE STEM CURRICULUM?

Civics education must be embedded across a variety of subjects, not limited to social studies. Civics concepts should permeate STEM fields, where the intersection of technology, ethics, and policy is increasingly important.

Leverage Initiatives Such As the 2023 National Cyber Workforce and Education Strategy:

Among the foundational skills highlighted in the strategy are the following:

• “Be Active Participants in Society and the Economy.”

• “Understand the Social, Technical, & Cultural Dynamics of Computational Technology, including Equity and Inclusion.”

• “Ethically, Securely, and Safely Use Information” and “Recognize the Rights, Privacy, Responsibilities, & Opportunities of an Interconnected Digital World.”

These objectives are all advanced by civics education.

The strategy also seeks to “Invigorate the Pursuit of Foundational Cyber Skills and Cyber Careers.” As noted earlier, the Commission on Public Service determined that teaching civics was one of the most important and foundational ways to inspire public service and careers with a mission.

Finally, the strategy notes that “cyber education should be integrated across disciplines so learners can gain the requisite knowledge and skills in relevant and contextualized learning experiences.” Again, the kind of cross-discipline approach advocated in this report meets that objective.

Support Teacher Training and Professional Development: Teachers play a central role in fostering civic engagement among students, but they need better support to effectively incorporate civics and ethics into STEM subjects. Professional development programs should equip educators with the tools to teach the ethical and civic dimensions of technology. Partnerships between schools, universities, and tech companies can also help educators stay up-to-date with the latest technological advancements and their societal implications. Additionally, teacher training schools should place greater emphasis on teaching educators to teach civics, especially in today’s politically polarized environment. This training should include an understanding of the pervasive impact of technology in government. For example, the rollout of the Affordable Care Act and efforts to use technology for a more transparent and accountable government could serve as relevant case studies. Potential STEM teachers should also be required to have a basic understanding of civics and the role of laws and be encouraged to use similar examples in their classes.

Inspire STEM-Related Civic Engagement: Schools across the country should experiment with integrating social studies and STEM concepts. For example, in 2021, U.S. history teachers at South Doyle High School in Knoxville, Tennessee, developed a cross-disciplinary project to explore the city’s lack of sidewalks. This project allowed students to learn about post–World War II history, 1950s building codes, urban planning, civil engineering, and even the health impacts of inadequate walking infrastructure, such as its effects on heart health and obesity rates. Although this is just one example, it demonstrates how some schools are working to bridge the gap between civics and the hard sciences.

Integrate Cybersecurity and AI as Use Cases: AI presents an unparalleled opportunity to engage students and the public in discussions about ethics and civic responsibility. Integrating AI as a focal point in civics education, from K–12 to higher education, can enhance students’ understanding of both historical context and the role technology plays in democracy. Policymakers, educators, and communities must work together to ensure AI is not only a subject of study but also a means to teach critical civics concepts.

National Security Agency and Department of Homeland Security Centers of Academic Excellence in Cybersecurity Designations

One way to incentivize higher education to bring civics concepts into more technical areas might be to leverage the National Security Agency (NSA) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Centers of Academic Excellence in Cybersecurity (CAE-C) designations. These official designations, awarded by the NSA and DHS, recognize academic institutions that demonstrate excellence in cybersecurity education and research. Because the cybersecurity standards required to achieve this designation are high, earning it can “enhance [an] institution’s reputation, attract top-tier students and faculty, and open doors to federal funding and partnerships.”

There are several designations under the CAE-C umbrella, including Cyber Defense Education (CAE-CDE), Cyber Research (CAE-R), and Cyber Operations (CAE-CO). As a result, incorporating a civics education component into one of these criteria could quickly incentivize academic institutions to invest in and prioritize civics education to attain these prestigious designations. Since civics would suddenly become a government-recognized standard with direct workforce applications — such as clear communication and effective compromise — the field could attain new prestige. This, in turn, could attract more students and adults to civics, fostering a culture of lifelong learning and civic engagement.

Incentivize Civics in STEM through Testing and Hiring: It’s often said that if you don’t test for it, it won’t be taught. Standardized tests could integrate some basic civics concepts, such as civic responsibility and respect for the rule of law, into questions related to STEM subjects. Additionally, as noted above, schools — particularly in higher education — tend to prioritize education that aligns with hiring demands. If businesses recognized the importance of a civically literate workforce and included this in their hiring decisions, it could significantly influence schools’ decisions on what to teach.

Address Equity and Inclusion in STEM and Civics Education: It is vital to create pathways for underrepresented groups to engage in both STEM and policymaking roles. Addressing barriers to entry and retention for first-generation and minority students is crucial for building a diverse and inclusive workforce. Programs should encourage these students to see themselves as active participants in both technological innovation and democratic governance, promoting civic responsibility alongside technical skills.

Reframe Civics Education as a Shared Responsibility: Civics education should be viewed as a collective responsibility involving educators, policymakers, businesses, and the public. Federal, state, and local governments must collaborate to scale ongoing efforts in civics education, while private-sector support can help bridge the resource gap. Additionally, integrating civics education as a criterion for attaining Centers of Excellence designations can incentivize higher education institutions to prioritize this critical area.

Use a Systems-Based Approach to Civics and STEM Integration: A holistic, systems-based approach is necessary to successfully integrate civics into STEM education. Collaboration across federal, state, and local governments; educational institutions; and tech companies is crucial for creating sustainable change. By aligning resources and goals across sectors, we can build an educational ecosystem that fosters technical expertise and civic engagement, ensuring that democracy and innovation go hand in hand.

To maximize the impact of the integration of civics in STEM education, existing initiatives must be scaled and interconnected. Numerous programs across education, government, and the private sector are working across STEM, ethics, and civic responsibility. However, these efforts often operate in silos, at times also using differing terminology, which further hinders efforts to identify and connect them. By creating stronger connections between these initiatives — whether through partnerships, shared resources, or collaborative platforms — we can amplify their reach and effectiveness.

To maximize the impact of the integration of civics in STEM education, existing initiatives must be scaled and interconnected.

Similarly, employers should ensure that as they implement initiatives to engage their workforces in ways that build their civic knowledge, skills, and engagement, they include aspects designed specifically to reach employees who are more STEM oriented. This should include finding ways for their employees to use their technical skills in civic engagement activities to strengthen their communities. Leaders should also clearly communicate why civics is important and encourage other tech sector leaders to do the same.

A coordinated, system-wide approach that aligns stakeholders at the local, state, and federal levels will allow for the replication of successful models, accelerating progress toward a more civically engaged, technically proficient workforce better prepared to address the challenges and opportunities of rapid innovation in a democracy.

Suzanne Spaulding is senior adviser for homeland security and director of the Defending Democratic Institutions project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). She also serves as a member of the Cyberspace Solarium Commission.

Paula Reynal is a program manager and research associate for the Defending Democratic Institutions Project at CSIS, where she supports the project’s research agenda and coordinates events.

Aosheng Pusztaszeri is a research assistant for the International Security Program at CSIS, where he supports research on the intersection of emerging technologies, national security, and intelligence.