Are students saying what they really think in civics classes?
Related: Threats to Democracy: Censorship and Speech Suppression
Self-Censorship Shows Prominence in Adolescence
A new report from the Sandra Day O’Connor Institute explored student self-censorship in high school civics classrooms.
- 58% of students surveyed said they withheld a political opinion because they were worried about how others might react.
- Even among the 73% of students who described themselves as generally comfortable sharing their views, 51% reported self-censoring at least once.
- Among those who self-censored, 91% cited other students as the concern, while 41% said the teacher was their concern.
- 26% were worried about being discussed or posted on social media, 21% about their grade, and 12% about parents or other adults hearing their views.
- 38% of students who self-censored said teachers created an environment that felt safe to disagree in and 68% said their teacher did not create a space for them to disagree.
The O’Connor Institute pointed out, “Not every decision to remain quiet is troubling. Listening is an important civic skill, and intellectual humility sometimes requires withholding judgment until one understands an issue better. Christian G. of California recalled occasions when he stayed quiet because he wanted to hear another person's ideas or did not yet know enough to debate the subject well.”
Nearly 80% of teachers said “fear of pushback or controversy led them to self-sensor,” and 53% of students reported seeing a teacher sometimes or often avoid, shut down, or cut short a class discussion about political or current events.
Self-censorship reaches far beyond high school hallways, but there are also tools to teach healthy disagreement.
Self-Censorship On Campuses – For Students and Faculty
Clinical psychology researchers Kevin Waldman and Forest Romm asked 1,452 undergraduates at Northwestern University and the University of Michigan between 2023 and 2025, “Have you ever pretended to hold more progressive views than you truly endorse to succeed socially or academically?” Eighty-eight percent said yes.
Just under 50% said they “routinely conceal beliefs in intimate relationships for fear of ideological fallout,” 73% said they did not trust conversations about morality with their close friends, and 38% identified as “morally confused.”
The researchers concluded, “Authenticity, once considered a psychological good, has become a social liability. And this fragmentation doesn’t end at the classroom door… It is identity regulation at scale, and it is being institutionalized.”
“Students appear to be the biggest contributors to self-censorship,” according to multi-sourced research out of Claremont McKenna College in 2025. The data suggested that “student progressivism predicts self-censorship and speech discomfort across domains,” but faculty play a prominent role in academic settings, as “faculty progressivism predicts speech discomfort in classroom discussions and on written assignments.” It specified, “Student-driven self-censorship is highest at small, private, and liberal arts colleges, and faculty-driven self-censorship is highest at large, public, and professions-oriented institutions.”
A national survey of higher educators conducted between 2023 and 2024 out of the American Association of Colleges and Universities in partnership with the American Association of University Professors and NORC at the University of Chicago found the following:
- “Most faculty support the discussion of controversial topics or issues in the classroom. Indeed, more than half (53%) believe such discussions should be encouraged and should occur frequently because of their educational value. And while just over a third (35%) do not believe such discussions should be encouraged, they nonetheless support discussion of controversial topics or issues as they arise in the classroom.”
- “The overwhelming majority of respondents (93%) believe that faculty should be intentional about inviting student perspectives from all sides of an issue, and two-thirds (67%) believe that faculty should be able to express their own personal views on issues while teaching.”
Nonetheless…
- “A quarter reported feeling pressure to conform their political views to align with the views of either administrators (25%) or the faculty as a whole (24%), and two-thirds (67%) have refrained from raising politically divisive topics with colleagues at their institution.”
- “Compared with six or seven years ago, or when they first joined the faculty at their current institution, just over half of all faculty (53%) are more worried today that their beliefs or activities as faculty members may make them targets of online harassment.”
Self-Censorship Doesn’t End With Education
Research published in Springer [not rated] in 2024 found that self-censorship has “significant effects on employee well-being and work-related attitudes.” It said that “willingness to self-censor was strongly associated with higher fear of social isolation, burnout, and turnover intentions, and with lower job satisfaction and social community.”
Findings out of Arizona State University furthered, “Self-censorship isn't simply a product of fear. It is a rational, strategic response shaped by the interplay of boldness, surveillance and punishment severity.”
A Path Toward Un-Censored Civics
The O’Connor institute said that students they surveyed wanted more opportunities for productive disagreement. It recommended making peer norms visible and lowering the social stakes of disagreement without lowering standards through anonymous opening responses or assigned positions.
Teachers have difficult jobs, and they’ve often been collateral damage in culture war issues, but there are ways to both prepare students for the future and avoid bias that may upset parents and school boards. One suggestion is to use Mismatch, a tool that pairs two classrooms of students from different backgrounds for a guided conversation using our Roundtables virtual meeting technology. Through Mismatch, students learn the skills needed to disagree and understand each other better across differences.
Civic education is not just about voting; civics encompasses the way we interact with our local communities and the infrastructure that keeps them running. Being able to navigate disagreement is crucial, from the homeowners’ association to the city council. When students begin to censor themselves, it’s a worrying sign, not only that they won’t have the skills to navigate conflict in a healthy way in adulthood, but also that they’ll fail to question larger issues.
Disagreement, honesty, and genuine curiosity drive innovation. When young people stop arguing and asking questions, they give up on the idea that the classroom — and the country — is a place for people like them, or at least that they could make it a place for people like them. To love a country is to feel free to critique it and improve it. We want young people that are hungry to contribute to the country and uphold it to its own ideals.
Written by News Analyst and Social Media Editor Maylana J. Bizier (Lean Right) and Bridging Coordinator, Media Analyst, and Roundtables Product Manager Clare Ashcraft (Center). It was reviewed by Product Manager Evan Wagner (Lean Left).
