**TL;DR - Secondary schools should teach politics as a mandatory school subject so that students learn more about political impact**. In an Oxford University blog post, Elena Jones mentions that 'around one third of millennials did not vote in the EU referendum', and very few students opted for Politics at A level in 2013 ( [OUP blog](https://blog.oup.com/2018/01/politics-teaching-secondary-school/) ). And while nowadays more and more young people are engaged with politics, learning about politics and political responsibility at an earlier age is really important for young people to know more about their power to change the world and make an impact on society. Indeed, young people are the future and they should be informed about the importance of politics from as early as possible. According to Matteo Bergamini, '[g]iven the right direction and with the right information in hand, young people have the potential to shape a better world - Greta Thunberg, Jack Andraka, Emma González and Malala Yousafzai are just a handful of names that spring to mind'. ( [Open Access Government](https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/brits-believe-politics-should-be-taught-school-curriculum/82803/) ). This is why secondary schools should contribute in laying the groundwork for a better knowledge of politics and political process. As Bergamini observes, if 'we want systemic engagement and change, we must bring Political Literacy into schools'. This will help young people become more engaged in the political process when they become adults.

**TL;DR: Whichever party politically dominates the government also controls the Department of Education, which controls nationwide curriculums. Secondary school political classrooms could easily become trojan horses for political parties to subconsciously push agendas, which could sway the collective thought of future voter generations.** In both the US and the UK, a department of education annually reviews and sets the national curriculum. In each country, the position of the department’s chief officer – the Secretary of Education – is a cabinet level position. It’s customary practice for new presidents and prime ministers to clean out the previous administration’s cabinet advisors in order to restock the positions with political allies along party lines. For example, conservative Prime Minister Boris Johnson appointed conservative Gavin Williamson to head the UK’s Department of Education in July of 2019, while democratic President Joe Biden appointed democrat Miguel Cardona as the US Secretary of Education on March 1st, 2021. Thus, the Department of Education and the curriculum it enforces is controlled by whichever political party dominates the government at any given time. Writing politics into secondary school curriculums gives the Department of Education independent power to determine what qualifies as political “core competencies.” Due to the above-illustrated top-down nature of federal bureaucracies, this provides a conduit for political parties to push their agendas on impressionable schoolchildren in ways that can permanently alter future generation’s ways of thinking. Because many political philosophies branch out from separate views of human nature, it’s entirely foreseeable for a political curriculum to foster a certain basal lens/way-of-thinking (weltanschauung) among its students, while still avoiding contemporary hot-button issues. Even minutely favoring certain philosophical tenets early on can radically shift an entire generation’s worldview down the line. If a generation of young students are indoctrinated with partisan values, they begin to take those lessons as axiomatic. Not even critical thinking cannot combat this kind of hive mind group-think, because critical reasoning skills themselves are developed in classrooms. Even hyper intelligent people are subject to subconscious biases. For example, it's been shown that [high IQ doesn’t correlate with low cognitive bias](https://www.globalcognition.org/intelligence-and-cognitive-bias/); rather, intelligent individuals simply craft clever intellectual defenses of their cognitive biases. Politics is not a stand-alone subject. It requires a wide base of knowledge from many different subjects. While well-intentioned, teaching politics in secondary schools gives politicians the power to plant the seeds of unconscious bias in future generations of voters.

Would it make more sense for Civics to be taught as a mandatory subject, rather than Politics? A class to explain how government works, the structure of our legal system, the civil service, etc... There's an argument that, in fact, we have **too much** politics in our lives, and that - to heal the deepening fractures in our societies, we need to spend more time thinking non-politically. See Bob Talisse's [Overdoing Democracy](https://global.oup.com/academic/product/overdoing-democracy-9780190924195?cc=gb&lang=en&) and a really excellent [podcast](https://www.parlia.com/article/rebuilding-democracy-equal-citizenship-talisse) covering this with him 😝.

I believe it makes complete sense for politics to be mandatory, at least in some capacity, in secondary schools across the country. Especially in current society, it is imperative that students learn as much as possible about the impact of politics on daily life. While young people do engage in politics in some small capacity currently, such as by opting into higher level high school courses, this amount is still not nearly enough to maintain a generational knowledge base in regards to politics. If political courses were made mandatory in secondary school, those who may not have thought they were interested in politics may find that to not be the case, and even those who are not remotely interested will more likely than not benefit from some sense of assurance and knowledge within themselves in regards to the political field in the United States. This newfound knowledge will also lead people to hold their representatives more accountable, being more in touch with current events, and generally creating a much healthier political environment, on a local, state, and federal level.

**TL;DR Politics is a crucial subject, however I believe there to be more important lessons and subjects that should be introduced as mandatory.** When I was at school, we were timetabled an hour a week of ‘PSCHEE’ which stands for Personal, Social, Cultural, Health and Economic Education. In theory, it was designed to be an all-round subject, highlighting the important subjects not covered in other classes. However, it was taught to us by a PE teacher and wasn’t considered nearly as important as other subjects, it felt more like a free period than an actual lesson, which is a shame as there are many important topics which could’ve been discussed in the class. School didn’t teach me how to own, buy or rent a house, do taxes, get a job and this, I believe, is a huge, missed opportunity and lessons like these and invaluable for all school leavers. Research has recently uncovered that [87% of Britons believe school failed to adequately prepare them for life as an adult] (https://metro.co.uk/2019/09/13/budgeting-mental-health-among-skills-wish-wed-learned-school-10734293/), meaning introducing mandatory structured ‘life’ lessons would positively impact students.