NY Times had an interesting article this morning about how much more informed children are about the political process. They went into two classrooms at an elementary school in Pennsylvania and talked with the kids and the teachers about their knowledge and interest in the political process. This is rather interesting for a number of reasons, which I'll outline below.
Just as their parents and grandparents are paying close attention to the drawn-out fight for the Democratic nomination, so too are those who will not cast an official vote for president for another decade or so. While no polling outfit has systematically canvassed those Americans who are more attuned to the nuances of Hannah Montana than Hannah Arendt, the enthusiasm generated by similar straw polls in places like Austin, Tex.; Scotch Plains, N.J.; and Broward County, Fla., suggests that young children are more engaged in this year’s presidential race than any other in recent memory.
"It’s just a frenzy," said Barbara Stefano, whose fourth-grade classroom is down a blue-and-cream cinder block corridor from Miss Boles’s, and who has been teaching for 44 years. "They know a lot more than they ever have. They know there’s a primary. I don’t ever remember talking about the primary in class before."
We know that adults of voting age are more invested in this election than they have been for decades, maybe even generations. But our actions and our noise are trickling down to the children who are not only discussing the issues with their parents, but are learning about the topics themselves through their online habits:
The students are also talking about the presidential race with their parents, and even doing some independent research.
"I remember something I learned about Hillary," Elizabeth told her classmates. "It’s not like a marriage between Hillary and Bill. It’s more like an agreement. She helps him. He helps her."
Asked where she had gleaned this information about Mrs. Clinton, from New York, and her husband, the former president, she said, "I saw it on AOL.com."
Although there is something to be concerned about if children are only getting their information through television commercials and online MSM outlets, this is still GREAT news for us. We have seen that the netroots activists can affect the national dialog and that they will increasingly continue to do so. Children today are also increasingly internet-savvy and capable of using it for research; granted, the jury's still out about children's critical thinking skills and their ability to read Wikipedia (or other information sources) with a grain of salt.
I remember my young cousin being completely invested in the 2000 elections (she was 7 at the time). She would generate poster boards about Al Gore and the environment and make elaborate speeches to her classmates about Gore's policies and how necessary it was to vote for him. These speeches and position displays she would create would be incredibly well-researched and very, very well-thought out. Her parents, conservative Republicans, were amused at her passion (and, I think, a bit concerned), but the rest of the family were varying degrees of liberal, so holiday mealtime conversations often became informative, with the facts flowing from all parties. But after such meetings, all of us would be better informed, and my cousin's research would be shared with us to bolster our own arguments.
The point of the story above is that, regardless of their age, children may have the time and the inclination to inform themselves of the issues, even outside of classroom assignments. We should not dismiss their importance in the political process out of hand. As there is a trickle-down effect from parent to child, there can also be a trickle-up effect from child to parent. A child's passion and knowledge about the issues can also have an affect on how the parents view those same issues.
Oh, and the results of the grade-wide voting? (Note that the children only selected from one of the Democratic candidates, since that primary is still contested)
Later, the teachers announced the gradewide results: 52 votes for Mr. Obama and 21 for Mrs. Clinton (with one ballot, marked for both, disqualified). In Miss Boles’s class, the vote was more lopsided: Mrs. Clinton garnered just 2 of the 20 votes cast.