Giving Compass' Take:

• Research from PACE offers insights into the ways that Americans perceive civic language. Notably, citizens are disconnected from the language used in the social sector. 

• How can funders and organizations shift their language to match the way that Americans think and talk about civic engagement? 

• Learn about ways to strengthen civic engagement. 

One theme came through clearly: Americans simply do not think or talk in the terms our field uses to describe democracy and civic engagement. The words and phrases practitioners use to describe this work—like civic engagement, activism, civility, and advocacy—do not tend to appear in the everyday vernacular of people beyond the scope of our field. But this dynamic goes deeper than language.

Not only do the vast majority of Americans not relate to the language most commonly used within our field to describe civic engagement and democracy, many of them also reported that it felt “like somebody else’s language.” This finding was notable: at the root of the divisions our nation faces today are feelings of disconnection—and distrust—in our system of government, and from each other. If the language we use to describe civic engagement feels to Americans like “somebody else’s language,” what does this mean for our efforts to bridge divides and cultivate the shared sense of responsibility and spirit of participation our democratic republic requires?

Another theme that surfaced is an apparent disconnect between individual personal experiences and a collective “big picture” of democracy. When focus group participants were invited to think about the concept of civic engagement, their most resonant associations were personal involvement with other individuals—themes of being a good person, neighbor, or community member, and the idea of “helping others” emerged consistently. While participants agreed that being of service to others was important, it is notable that the extent of most visions of civic participation were focused on the individual, personto-person level, and not necessarily connecting civic participation to visions for broader, institutional change.

While the focus of much of this research centered on specific words and phrases, another pattern emerged: context matters too. While one of the inspirations for this project was a shared concern by many funders and practitioners that particular words and phrases feel politicized in our current political climate, most focus group respondents suggested that context matters more than actual words. Survey results did indicate some differences in perception based on political affiliation and demographic characteristics, but focus group participants indicated they didn’t put a lot of stock into the meaning of words as much as what they perceive to be their intent. A common refrain we heard was “they’re just words,” though as we dug deeper, there was acknowledgement that what those words symbolize often feels personal and important.

Another theme that emerged in the data in various ways is an apparent lack of a shared vision or aspiration for our democracy. As Topos Partnership described, “It seems Americans have no strong, clear sense of what a healthy, civically engaged democracy or society entails. This appears to be an important reason why they have so little shared vocabulary in this domain.” This finding surfaced as a pattern in focus group discussions, and was also supported by survey data: when respondents were asked how they would describe civically engaged people and actions, responses were scattered and lacked a central focus that might be understood as “civic engagement” in the ways our field commonly sees this concept. This absence of a shared vision for a healthy democracy and civic life, sparks the question: how can we talk with others about ideas and work toward a vision we cannot collectively imagine? Furthermore, given that language both reflects and shapes reality: if we do not have the language (or our existing language isn’t resonating), how does this impact the creation of a shared vision for our democracy?