Cultivating empathic listening in democratic education

ABSTRACT

Grounded in theories that establish connections among democratic listening, relational dimensions of citizenship, and civic engagement, this mixed methods case study takes up preliminary findings from prior research and explores processes that allow for empathic listening in democratic education and the outcomes promoted by empathic listening. The case focuses on an action civics curriculum—Project Soapbox—implemented in a demographically diverse exurban high school. Findings highlight how, among both students and adults, listening to Project Soapbox speeches led to greater learning about and valuing of new perspectives, increased empathy, greater understanding across difference, and a deepened sense of connection and trust. The data revealed four inter-related conditions or practices that appeared to promote empathic listening: deliberate community building that surfaced students’ values, the opportunity for all students to speak and be heard, active listening practices, and the willingness to be vulnerable and share personal stories. We propose a theory of empathic listening in democratic education and contend that empathic listening is a civic skill that can and should be taught. Further, we suggest that the humanizing form of empathic listening we describe here is one civic tool that could address the deep inequalities that plague our democracy.

KEYWORDS:

• Action civics
• civic education
• democratic education
• empathy
• high schools
• listening

Acknowledgments

We are extremely grateful to those teachers and students who were willing to participate in this study. We would also like to thank Jessica Bishop-Royse for her methodological assistance and Jay Shuttleworth for his feedback on a previous version of this work.

Notes

1. We collected 80 pre-surveys and 70 post-surveys from students. A number of students did not provide their name in either the pre-survey (10) or the post-survey (18), so their responses could not be matched for pre/post analysis. Ultimately, we were able to match pre- and post-surveys for 50 students. Post-only questions are based on the sample of 57 students who answered the relevant questions.

2. Copies of the survey instrument are available from the authors by request.

Additional information

Funding

This research was supported by a University Research Council grant from DePaul University.