Debate for Civic Learning: A Model for Renewing Higher Education’s Civic Mission

Main Article Content

Paul Mabrey
Kevin E. Boston-Hill
Drew Stelljes
Jess Boersma


Rapidly eroding financial support and tuition increases that outpace inflation threaten the viability of an education that considers civic engagement as foundational. Simultaneously, institutions of higher education are increasingly perceived by the public as market-driven entities existing for the economic benefit of the individual, the upward mobility of a social class, and in turn the further sedimentation of racial and class differences. Now, more than ever, our nation is in need of deliberate attempts to fashion common understandings, ways to navigate inevitable disagreements, and reasonable paths forward. Higher education is positioned to respond to these civic needs but requires a commitment to be bold and remain dedicated to our shared civic mission in the face of alarming polarization and vacated institutional trust. One way institutions of higher education can return to their shared sense of civic mission is with the integration of debate across the curriculum through innovative partnerships and collaborative design. Debate across the curriculum utilizes intentional course redesign to offer active learning experiences that combine public speaking, evidence-based reasoning, collaborative learning, and argumentation into various advocacy simulations. The debate for civic learning model has faculty partnered across multiple institutions to design, integrate, and assess debate-based pedagogy to positively impact student civic learning. Students and faculty across disciplines have reported that debate-based pedagogy helped improve classroom engagement, critical problem solving, perspective taking, empathy, and advocacy skills. This mixed-method research provides insights not only into debate-based course design and learning improvement strategies but also into how faculty, students, and administrators can partner between institutions to demonstrate a shared commitment to the civic mission of higher education and democratic promise of our nation.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Mabrey, P., Boston-Hill, K. E., Stelljes, D., & Boersma, J. (2021). Debate for Civic Learning: A Model for Renewing Higher Education’s Civic Mission. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 21(4).
Pedagogy of the Polarized


Fisler, J. & Pelco, L. E. (2020). Civic Engagement in Virginia’s Public Higher Education Institutions. Diversity & Democracy 22:4,

Gormley Jr, W. T. (2017). The Critical Advantage: Developing Critical Thinking Skills in School. Harvard Education Press. 8 Story Street First Floor, Cambridge, MA 02138.

Hoffman, D., Domagal-Goldman, J., King, S., & Robinson, V. (2018). Higher education’s role in enacting a thriving democracy: Civic learning and democratic engagement theory of change.

Hogan, J. M., Kurr, J. A., Johnson, J. D. & Bergmaier, M. J. (2016). Speech and debate as civic education. Communication Education. 65(4), 377-381.

James Madison Center for Civic Engagement (n.d.). Civic Engagement & Political Learning Assessment.

Levine, P. (2006). Learning and democracy: Civic education. The Kettering Review, 24(3), 32–42.

National Task Force on Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement. (2012). A crucible moment: College learning and democracy’s future. Association of American Colleges and Universities.

Roland, R.C. (2017). Public Debate and American Democracy: Guidelines for Pedagogy. In J.M.

Hogan, J.A. Kurr, M.J. Bergmaier, & J.D. Johnson (Eds.), Speech and Debate as Civic Education (81-93). University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.

Torney‐Purta, J., Cabrera, J. C., Roohr, K. C., Liu, O. L., & Rios, J. A. (2015). Assessing civic competency and engagement in higher education: Research background, frameworks, and directions for next‐generation assessment. ETS Research Report Series, 2015(2), 1–48.

Westheimer, J., & Kahne, J. (2004). What kind of citizen? The politics of educating for democracy. American Educational Research Journal, 41, 237–269.