House subcommittee hearing spotlights civics education and debate over 'critical race theory' in K‑12

At a House Education and Labor subcommittee hearing in Washington, D.C., Chairman Aaron Bean and witnesses discussed whether critical race theory (CRT) has entered K‑12 classrooms and took up broader questions about strengthening civics education and teacher preparation.

The panel — including Ian Rowe of the American Enterprise Institute, Dr. Chad Atkins of the University of North Carolina's School of Civic Life and Leadership (SCILL), and Michael Weiser of the Jack Miller Center — described a mix of curricular concerns and programmatic responses. "Unfortunately, the answer to your question, is yes," Ian Rowe said when asked whether CRT is present in schools. Rowe also noted that lesson sets his partners developed "have now been downloaded more than 200,000 times by teachers in all 50 states." Dr. Chad Atkins told the panel, "America is facing grave challenges to our democratic life," and described SCILL's effort to teach students founding texts and civil discourse. Michael Weiser said the Jack Miller Center seeks to provide teachers with professional development and called the center's work "a renaissance of interest in civic education."

Why it matters: Members and witnesses framed the debate in two linked ways. Supporters of the "back to basics" approach argued that stronger civic knowledge and shared knowledge of founding documents foster self‑government and social cohesion. Others — including several members during questioning — stressed that curriculum decisions remain local and said federal lawmakers should focus on issues the federal government can address, such as school facilities and funding for special education.

The hearing mixed examples and prescriptions. Rowe described practices he says are linked to CRT's influence, such as identity‑based exercises and trainings he called "destructive actions." He urged curricula that tell a "comprehensive" account of American history: "Tell the entire story. Have confidence that American history, rightly told in a comprehensive fashion, will inspire the very reverence I think we all seek," he said. Dr. Atkins and Mr. Weiser emphasized teacher supports and campus programs to foster civil discourse; Atkins described SCILL courses in the American political tradition and a planned civil‑discourse residential community.

Members on both sides emphasized teacher preparation and classroom practice. Ranking Member Suzanne Bonamici said the federal government "does not dictate curriculum" and urged investment in teacher professional development and programs that expand opportunities for low‑income students. Representative Jahana Hayes, a former K‑12 teacher, told the committee federal law limits the government's role in local curriculum decisions and advocated strengthening local curricula and teacher capacity.

On related topics, witnesses and members raised social media's effect on discourse, the need to teach source analysis and the Founders' documents, and the role of school choice as a mechanism parents use when they disagree with local curricula. Several witnesses and members urged caution about labeling all references to race as CRT; Ranking Member Bobby Scott noted that CRT is a law‑school theory and said calling every mention of race CRT is "absurd."

The hearing produced no legislative actions. Instead, witnesses presented curricular models, professional development proposals, and university‑level programs intended to support K‑12 civics education.

The hearing closed with bipartisan agreement that, while members disagreed about the scale and scope of CRT in K‑12 settings, civic knowledge and teacher capacity are central issues for the nation's schools.