By: Isabela DosAnjos (Clough Correspondent, International Studies Student)
By: Isabela DosAnjos (Clough Correspondent, International Studies Student)
Isabela DosAnjos is a Clough Correspondent at the Clough Center, and is majoring in International Studies and minoring in Arts History at Boston College.
The second day of the Clough Spring Symposium on Democratic Resilience featured a panel on “educating for resilience,” bringing together Carol Ferrara of Emerson College, Raul Fernandez and Mary Churchill of Boston University, and Peter Levine of Tufts University, chaired by Erik Owens of Boston College. The panel examined how educational systems shape civic capacity and democratic sustainability from both theoretical and applied perspectives.
Professor Erik Owens opened by situating the discussion within a broader framework of democratic education. He emphasized education’s role in cultivating citizens capable of sustaining democratic institutions and posed guiding questions, such as “what makes a good citizen?” and “how can we learn from other countries?” This framing highlighted the importance of comparative inquiry and normative reflection.
Professor Carol Ferrara began by examining education and state-building in France, arguing that schooling functions as a mechanism of citizen formation. She characterized this model as paternalistic, noting the assumption that schools, rather than families or communities, are the primary sites for cultivating values and civic identity. This emphasis, she suggested, contributes to a national project of conformity in which unity is privileged over pluralism. Minority populations, particularly Muslim students, for example, often experience marginalization in public schools.
Ferrara thus advanced two arguments. First, she argued that a civic and moral education which does not meaningfully engage social and cultural plurality cannot adequately prepare students for democratic participation. Second, she contended that, “unless France is able to culturally decolonize and find ways to fully recognize and embrace its diversity, France’s education system will continue to perpetuate social, cultural, and regional inequalities, hindering the flourishing of a democratically resilient youth.” Her analysis underscored the tension between cohesion and inclusivity.
Professor Peter Levine then discussed autonomous associations as components of democratic resilience. He argued that strengthening self-governing groups and expanding participation can improve democratic health. Drawing on the 2020 American National Election Study, he identified a correlation between involvement in community groups and trust in institutions such as schools and the media, a pattern that persists across demographic controls.
While acknowledging the limits of statistical analysis, Levine emphasized the value of these findings in identifying patterns of civic behavior. He drew particular attention to how voluntary associations can be formed and sustained amid economic and technological change, proposing AI-driven helpdesk systems as a potential method to lower barriers to participation and provide emerging groups with organizational tools.
Professor Raul Fernandez offered a practice-oriented perspective grounded in his work in education and racial equity. He argued that contemporary school segregation in the United States “poses a profound threat to democratic resilience.” Despite Massachusetts’ strong public-school reputation, access to quality education remains uneven. He noted that “more than 100,000 students attend intensely segregated non-white schools, where about 90 percent are students of color living in varying degrees of poverty.”
Fernandez emphasized that these disparities are a direct result of policy choices that limit access to opportunity, power, and representation. Such inequities undermine democracy by excluding populations from meaningful participation. As he stated, segregation “doesn’t just concentrate disadvantage; it also isolates experience,” producing a racial dialogue gap that constrains democratic deliberation.
Rejecting assimilation, Fernandez advocated for equity and meaningful interaction across difference. He argued that “without equity democracy becomes exclusion and without encounter it becomes fragmentation.” His remarks highlighted the need for structural reform alongside cultural change.
Professor Mary Churchill concluded by identifying three troubling U.S. trends: declining college enrollment, increasing book bans, and the decimation of local journalism. She argued that these developments weaken democracy’s informational and educational foundations and emphasized the central role of higher education in addressing them.
Churchill called for renewed curiosity and innovation in reimagining higher education’s purpose and accessibility. She challenged the narrative that “not everyone needs to go to college,” warning that it risks reinforcing inequality and limiting civic opportunity. Expanding access, she argued, is a democratic imperative.
Overall, the panel offered a multifaceted analysis of education’s role in shaping and supporting democratic resilience, highlighting challenges of inequality and exclusion while pointing to opportunities for reform and innovation.
About The Author
Leave a Reply