In the face of abounding criticism of the lack of informed, involved, and concerned citizenship in the United States, the role of citizenship education has moved to the forefront of educational theory. In Educating Citizens Colby et. al. further the case for civic goals in higher education by, first, giving a detailed analysis of the forms and components of civic education and, second, presenting models of the integration of citizenship education at the post-secondary level. Though written by four authors, the work offers a remarkably coherent, continuous, and stylistically unified argument.

Colby et. al. usefully distinguish three forms of citizenship education, each with a distinct goal. A first is "community connection," in which students are lead to greater social involvement at a time when society has been characterized as dangerously fragmented, paradigmatically by Putnam's Bowling Alone. Second, schools might encourage specifically ethical and moral virtues on the part of their students. This would entail teaching students to live lives of integrity and responsibility, adhering to the moral ideals of their society in their economic, social, and political pursuits. Recent financial scandals and concerns over loss of virtue and the increase of egoism and relativism highlight the relevance of such a project. A third goal of citizen education is social justice. Here students would be trained to become social critics and activists, rather than passive clients of the state who take the status quo for granted. Citizenship education could involve some or all of these. While the authors avoid making definitive recommendations of a particular model, their argument implies that promotion of all three forms of citizenship is ideal.

The authors also analyze three necessary components of any citizenship education program. First, consistent with the goals of most educators, university programs must foster student understanding of civic ideals and their application to the contemporary world. In addition, education for citizenship must involve two things less commonly associated with the academy. It must foster motivation on the part of students to act on their moral and social knowledge; and cultivate student skills applicable to the practical pursuit of their ideals, including leadership, communication, and organizing abilities.

Educating Citizens discusses how to meet these goals in the context of analyzing the programs at twelve institutions that have made a commitment to citizenship education. The institutions selected are diverse including not only large state universities California State University at Monterrey Bay and Portland State University, but also religiously affiliated universities, such as Notre Dame, the elite private Duke University, the Air Force Academy, traditionally African American Spelman College, traditionally women's College of St. Catherine, and smaller four-year public and private colleges and community colleges. These programs exhibit the diversity of ways in which a university can tailor citizenship education to its mission, traditions, campus culture and student body. However, there appear to be some features common to successful programs, including commitment on the part of administration and faculty to citizenship education, planning and training of how to integrate civic concerns into courses across the curriculum, integration of citizenship into university requirements, and the fostering of a culture of civic involvement and integrity outside the classroom. Service learning and other hands-on and community outreach programs are also common. When all of these are planned with civic goals in mind, argue the authors, colleges can be seen to have a positive effect on civic development. The descriptions of college programs and courses serve as both examples for the argument and as possible models for replication or adaptation in new programs.

The authors acknowledge some barriers to citizenship education, including the tendencies toward careerism among students, budgetary concerns among administrators and funders, and disciplinary narrowness among faculty. They also answer the objection that college is too late to educate individuals for citizenship, as characters are largely fixed in the early years of personality development. Colby et. al. reply that while a university education cannot program citizens into active, virtuous citizens in the precise mode of educators' choosing, it can initiate processes of understanding, involvement, and commitment that continue to develop after graduation from college. Thus, the authors are able to draw on a wealth of anecdotal evidence that university experiences, in and out of the classroom, greatly impact Americans' development as citizens.

Nevertheless, as an argument for civic education Educating Citizens is inevitably incomplete. There is no systematic reply to objections to the goal of citizenship education. Detractors argue that such programs inevitably amount to indoctrination, are divisive, or detract from schools' fundamental academic mission. The authors' reply that education inevitably has some ethical goals and impacts students' political life -- and therefore cannot be strictly neutral -- is relevant, but it does not conclusively refute the argument for "civic minimalism." As a theoretical defense of citizenship education, the work is undermined by the authors' haste to elaborate various forms of citizenship education at the expense of defending the overall project.

The discussion of universities which successfully integrate citizenship education furthers the case for pursuing these goals elsewhere. However, one may wonder if these programs have succeeded in part because of their institutions' preexisting and relatively unified missions by virtue of their definition as women's, historically black, Catholic, or military colleges. Other schools may be less able to forge agreement on civic goals and recruit a student body committed to these ideals. It would be of some interest if the authors could complete their case studies with more background on the debates leading up to the institutional commitment to citizenship promotion, particularly in public universities with diverse populations, where the choice and definition of education's ethical and political goals is likely to be highly contested. The authors hopefully suggest that citizenship goals may be more wholeheartedly embraced in the aftermath of September 11. However, the U.S. response to terrorism might be argued to have the opposite effect, creating still greater reliance upon technocrats whose security recommendations are not politically challenged and leading to suspicion of one's neighbors and lack of concern for promoting social equality.
It would also be helpful to see data regarding the effect of such citizenship programs on both students' relative future involvement in society and politics and academic performance. Though Educating Citizens discusses possible evaluation procedures to document progress in programs, it does not support its overall case with quantitative evidence.

Despite the necessarily inconclusive nature of its argument and evidence, the book is of great value for its presentation of a working conception of citizenship education and its wealth of suggested program features and models. I highly recommend the text for anyone interested in the theory of the integration of civic and educational goals and, especially, to any administrators or faculty members planning to adopt citizenship goals in their courses, curricula, and university missions.

Jordy Rocheleau,
Austin Peay State University