�鶹������ý

Broadly, civic efforts at community colleges fall into two categories: civic education and civic engagement. The former often prioritizes improving students’ knowledge about politics, governing, the democratic process, or elections, including through government courses, nonpartisan voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, or public panels focused on local policy issues. In contrast, civic engagement efforts encourage students to become active in their communities through volunteering, participating in campus clubs, or organizing initiatives. This programming can also include what’s known as service learning or community-based learning, in which students apply classroom lessons to real-world scenarios, such as a history student volunteering at a local museum.��

A 2024 study by the Center for the Study of Community Colleges and Mississippi State University, which surveyed 128 institutions in 38 states, found that a substantial number of community colleges support civic efforts in their institutions. Of those surveyed, 77 percent had incorporated civic engagement priorities into their strategic plans, more than 50 percent had a designated center or office that guides civic engagement, and 60 percent supported civic efforts with some degree of funding.¹ However, the authors noted that there was a “notable bifurcation” between schools with minimal, occasional programming and those with institutionalized robust engagement. For example, 44 percent of all colleges offered at least one service-learning course, but only 7 percent had integrated service learning into more than 21 courses. Similarly, while 78 percent engaged in voter registration or education activities, the frequency of these and other comparable events varied greatly.��

Additionally, there is often a large gap between institutional civic goals and resources available for implementation. For example, although a recent survey found that 92 percent of institutions offer community-based projects in their curricula, only 32 percent offer professional development programs that train faculty in how to carry out this work. ² It may not be surprising, then, that a separate study found that 74 percent of students have never taken part in such activities.³

When higher education institutions do offer and implement civic opportunities, enrollees benefit. College students who took part in civic engagement learning activities were found to have higher grade point averages and retention rates as well as improved critical thinking skills, communication abilities, academic knowledge, and leadership capabilities.⁴ For community college students in particular, voting has been associated with a greater likelihood of attaining a bachelor’s degree.⁵ Their schools’ intentionality toward civic engagement was connected to increased civic agency, behavior, and capacity.⁶ In his work running the Elgin Community College Center for Civic Engagement, Ramirez has also noticed that civic programming creates space for students to make friends, have fun together, and build strong social ties.

Engagement on campus can be indirectly powerful as well. Ramirez said that because of the community college’s place in its society, “when something happens at our college, it’s important, it’s got legitimacy.” That means if a school creates platforms for collaborative decision making and centers community voices who are often not heard, it can be a “transformational experience”—a rare example that shows that a balance in power is possible.⁷

Even when administrations prioritize and institutionalize civic education and engagement, community colleges face persistent obstacles to implementing these opportunities.��

One challenge is the high level of demand on both students and staff. Because most enrollees live off campus and juggle jobs, caregiving, and other competing responsibilities, students often have less time and access to in-person and extracurricular activities than those at four-year institutions. Faculty members spoke of a student government leader who worked multiple jobs on top of his course load and mothers who balanced on-campus engagement, full-time positions, and caring for young children or relatives with disabilities.⁸ Similarly, faculty members often have bigger course loads than their peers at four-year colleges and universities. Part-time adjunct professors—who typically divide their time across multiple institutions—may have even less capacity to take on additional roles, limited access to personal meeting space like offices, and less knowledge of available resources.⁹

Community colleges have also historically operated within resource-scarce environments, and a lack of funding is a major obstacle to civic initiatives.¹⁰ These trends have only intensified in recent years. As of 2020, community colleges received $8,800 less in educational revenue per student than four-year institutions, translating into a resource gap of $78 billion.¹¹ The COVID-19 pandemic put additional strain on community colleges and their students. As more enrollees faced urgent economic challenges (like food insecurity) some administrations focused their resources on providing vital support (such as opening food pantries on campus). Although the pandemic has stabilized in recent years, many students are still facing mental health challenges and operating in what one professor called “survival mode” due to external pressures like the rising costs of living and an unstable job market.¹² Though college administrations have continued to prioritize student assistance, they’ve also grappled with cuts to federal grants and social services in the second Trump Administration, which will translate into less funding for community colleges.¹³��

The cultural environment around civic engagement has also shifted in recent years.��

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, safety concerns, intense pressure on faculty and community partners, and staff resignations and retirements contributed to a decrease in civic opportunities. Additionally, the shift to virtual classes frayed cultures of in-person, on-campus engagement.¹⁴ By 2025, some institutions still reported lower levels of student participation or were only beginning to observe a rise in engagement.¹⁵

At the same time, political polarization has made civic activities more complex. In 2024, ideological polarization among Americans who identified as Republicans or Democrats reached historic levels.¹⁶ As of April 2025, states had introduced more than 30 bills and executive orders limiting diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives on public college campuses, often including restrictions on teaching supposedly “progressive” or “liberal” topics in class. Already, this legislation has been passed in 14 states, from Utah and Wyoming to Arkansas and Florida.¹⁷ In this environment, some community college leaders reported that even nonpartisan engagements can be viewed as partisan if they mention the word “democracy.”¹⁸ At one school, an ethics investigation was opened into a professor who had a local elected official speak to a class even though the discussion was strictly focused on how city government functioned.¹⁹ Another professor heard from a peer who had been criticized for using the word civic while talking about civic engagement on the grounds that the term was too political.²⁰

Finally, some professors have also observed that many of their students feel significant exhaustion, cynicism, and disillusionment about politics, particularly at the national level.²¹ This anecdotal evidence aligns with research studies that have found a “pervasive fatalism” among younger voters due to the failure of governments to address critical issues like climate change, health care, and the costs of education.²²

Despite this broader political environment, young people remain eager to participate as members of a democracy. Of voters between 18 and 29, 47 percent cast ballots in the 2024 election, compared with only 39 percent in 2016.²³ Additionally, college students from across the political spectrum still overwhelmingly support constructive discourse on campus. A 2023 study found that 94 percent of liberal, moderate, and conservative students agree that “we should listen to others with an open mind, including those with whom we disagree.” Ninety percent agreed that “no matter how different we are, we can understand each other’s experiences by listening and empathizing.”

Similarly, many community college administrators and staff members are still committed to realizing their institutions’ democratic potential. The widespread adoption of civic initiatives is one key indicator.²⁴ Another is the degree of innovation, integration, and experimentation that academic leaders are dedicating toward these efforts.��

Today, some of the most promising civic models at community colleges often fall into three main categories: investing in institutional capacity, supporting civic learning, and partnering with students.

Given the lack of civic infrastructure at many higher education institutions, many vital initiatives are focused on establishing, growing, and strengthening civic initiatives on campuses across the country.��

Some of the largest efforts in the United States are led by the , which is focused on encouraging nonpartisan student democratic engagement at more than 1,000 partner campuses in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The organization guides community colleges—as well as four-year colleges and universities—through programs that offer “incentives, structures, and accountability” for administrators and students working to expand civic education, political participation, and voter engagement. Participating schools can develop and submit “action plans” for increasing voter participation during specific election cycles, for example, or join “communities of practice” in which they can consult with other campus leaders working toward shared goals. In recognition of schools’ efforts, ALL IN offers awards, including titles like “Highly Engaged Campuses.”

The organization’s ultimate aims are to shift culture around engagement and increase strategic capacity; they hope that administrative leaders will be able to use a wide range of resources, from budgets to personnel, to “institutionalize nonpartisan democratic engagement.”²⁵ According to ALL IN’s 2024 annual impact report, 86 percent of participating campuses said they “promote civic learning…to a moderate or great extent,” and 74 percent said they support “nonpartisan political engagement.” ALL IN community colleges see consistently higher voter turnout during elections compared with peer institutions that do not participate in the program, with increases ranging from 2 to 3 percentage points.²⁶ This track record suggests that external programs and coalition-building initiatives can be powerful tools for expanding civic opportunities on campus.

Holistic forms of civic learning focus not only on strengthening students’ understanding of democratic institutions but also on bolstering their participatory skills.²⁷ Here, the goal is for students to graduate with improved knowledge of democratic levers for change, heightened bridge-building and problem-solving capacity, experience collaborating in real-world environments, and an understanding of civics and ethical topics that relate to their professional field.²⁸ And, ideally, this education should be available to all community college enrollees, not only those entering civics-adjacent fields like law enforcement.��

Allegany College of Maryland (ACM)—a rural-serving, two-year public college in Appalachia—follows this broad, integrated approach to civic education and engagement and works to embed it in the culture of the organization.²⁹ ACM’s administration, faculty, and staff aim to provide every student with an education in civic learning and democratic engagement.³⁰ One of their general-education learning goals is a college-wide outcome that focuses on personal and civic responsibility, culminating in a community project and reflection exercise in which students “identify the civic issues encountered and personal insights gained.”³¹

The school also has a Civic and Community Engagement Committee (CCEC)—made up of faculty, administrators, program directors, employees, and students—that leads the institution’s civic engagement work. The committee facilitates skill-building curricula, dialogues, college workshops and events, and faculty training, and it develops classroom exercises. To tie these lessons to real-world practice, the CCEC promotes voter registration on campus and connects students to local volunteer opportunities. Through these activities, ACM offers civic opportunities to students, from one-time engagement activities to long-term placements that underscore students’ community-building passions and future career interests. In 2022, ACM had the highest percentage of student voters of all two-year institutions in Maryland.³² In 2026, ACM was recertified under the Carnegie Foundation’s Community Engagement Classification in recognition of its “extraordinary commitment to community engagement, partnerships, and public service.”³³

Other institutions focus on preparing students to be civic leaders by prioritizing long-term engagement opportunities, training programs, and hands-on experiences that emphasize students’ sustained participation, skill-building, and ownership. Typically, these activities take place outside the classroom and, as a result, are often most accessible to students who can dedicate time to extracurricular activities. In these environments, students gain concrete skills, leadership abilities, and mentorship thanks to staff leaders who can guide them through engagement projects and broader questions about their lives and careers.³⁴ At Elgin Community College’s Center for Civic Engagement, Ramirez said he watches students change through these experiences: They gain a sense of their own power and can suddenly “see all these other possibilities… That is something you can’t really put back in the bottle.”³⁵

Like Elgin, Austin Community College (ACC) exemplifies this approach. Located in one of the biggest cities in Texas, ACC enrolls more than 70,000 students every year online and across 12 campuses.³⁶ The school’s Center for Government and Civic Service (CGCS) has a mission of “training and empowering students to be impactful civic leaders” and carries out its work “by, with, and through ACC students.” Enrollees can participate in a wide range of initiatives, such as organizing a summit on climate resilience with nonprofits, advocates, and policymakers or acting as a monitoring body to report on the City of Austin’s implementation of its open-governance goals.³⁷ Through their participation, students can also earn free badges and micro-credentials that are verified by ACC in topics like technology and society.³⁸ Every CGCS program emphasizes direct student leadership—encouraging students to pitch project ideas and relying on student interns to play key staffing roles in the organization.

These three common models of engagement reflect the current spectrum of opportunities on community college campuses.��

Each category of engagement is equally important and critical in its own right. Civic education initiatives create a vital foundation, providing essential information for students to understand and practice American democracy. Skill-building opportunities allow students to sharpen key participatory competencies. Civic leadership initiatives are characterized by student empowerment and ownership; they help rising generations of community leaders learn to identify public challenges, design solutions, and implement their ideas, all while building lifelong networks of activists, nonprofit executives, and government officials. Because this final category demands intensive resources and long-term commitments, these opportunities are much less common and less accessible for many institutions.

Across these categories of engagement, one consistency is the focus of participation: Engagement opportunities are often focused externally, encouraging students to respond to critical community needs or participate in elections. It is much less common for schools to give broad groups of enrollees any decision-making power inside their institutions, such as in making recommendations for a college’s strategic plan. Traditionally, these opportunities are available to a few students through organizations like the student government or limited advisory seats on administrative committees. They do not normally provide channels for larger numbers of enrollees or representative samples to weigh in on decisions that will affect them.

As a result, there are several areas of untapped potential where community colleges could expand their students’ civic development by focusing on partnership and empowerment—even in today’s politically complicated and resource-restricted environment.