Your Cart is Empty
Dear ACTA friend,
Since its founding, the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) has advocated for strengthening civic education at America’s colleges and universities. Our democratic republic depends on an educated citizenry—the rising generation must have a robust understanding of our nation’s history and system of government.
Our country is facing a civic knowledge crisis, and with it, a crisis of civic order. ACTA’s recent survey, Losing America’s Memory 2.0, has brought to light some startling findings about the state of civic literacy among college students. Most students are unable to identify the speaker of the House of Representatives, term lengths for members of Congress, or the branch of government with the power to declare war.
It is unconscionable that so many students graduate college today without understanding their own system of government, especially in an age of rising polarization, falling social trust, increasing political violence, and decreasing feelings of political efficacy.
Our survey has drawn national media attention. In an article covering our findings, the New York Post wrote, “[colleges and universities] have abdicated the responsibility to inculcate even the most basic knowledge required to be an informed and engaged citizen.” On July 17, ACTA’s Paul & Karen Levy Fellow in Campus Freedom, Steven McGuire, was interviewed by Scripps News about the survey’s findings and the urgent need for universities to institute a required course in American history and government.
Over the next two years, leading up to the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, we are rolling out a series of programs to urge colleges and universities to strengthen civic education. I encourage you to explore our new webpage dedicated to civic literacy, which can be found here, and I look forward to updating you on our work.
Thank you for your support. Together, we can ensure that the next generation is equipped to carry forward the values that define our great nation.
Warm regards,
Michael Poliakoff
President
ACTA is an independent, non-profit organization committed to academic freedom, excellence, and accountability at America’s colleges and universities.
Comments will be approved before showing up.
The protests that greeted Department of Homeland Security General Counsel James Percival a UCLA School of Law in April were not surprising. Law students, especially at highly ranked schools like UCLA, have become notoriously intolerant of disfavored speakers coming to campus — and few institutions are quite as polarizing as DHS in the “Abolish ICE” era. It was striking, however, that the students who organized the interruptions of Percival’s presentation — with heckling, hacking coughs, cellphones, and the occasional profanity — did exactly what “snowflake” students have been ridiculed and denounced for doing when encountering someone they don’t agree with.
What happens when an entire profession can’t see what’s hiding in plain sight in its own data? That puzzle animated Stony Brook University sociologist Musa al-Gharbi’s keynote at the Heterodox Academy 2026 West Coast Regional Conference, held recently at UC Berkeley.
The deeper problem, he contends, is not bad-faith activism but a structural one: peer review, editing, and committee deliberation only correct for bias when the people doing the correcting actually differ from one another, and the academy and the press increasingly do not. His full speech is transcribed below.
Two years after protests over the Israel-Hamas war roiled college campuses, resulting in the arrests of more than 3,000 students and faculty, a new study finds that students generally oppose punishing “objectionable speech,” unless they consider it “highly harmful.”
The study, conducted by researchers from the Universities of Pennsylvania and Colorado and Stanford and Columbia Universities and published in April in Science Advances, also found that students’ views of objectionable speech depend largely on whom it is targeted at.
