Once again, we've had bad news about American students' performance in school. On May 9, the U.S. Department of Education released the results of the 2001 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) examination on U.S. history. The exam tested 29,000 students in fourth, eighth and 12th grades, rating their historical knowledge as basic, proficient or advanced.

The results? Today, when our system of government is under profound attack, 57 percent of high school seniors -- soon-to-be voters -- actually score below basic on their knowledge of U.S. history. These students neither know the basic facts about our nation's heritage nor understand their importance.

Just how little do kids know? Well, only 57 percent of fourth-graders know that the Civil War was fought, in large part, over slavery. Only 39 percent of eighth-graders know that the biggest factor leading American colonists to form the First Continental Congress was frustration with Great Britain. A mere 30 percent of seniors can identify the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which has been the linchpin of American and European military defense for 50 years.

Here's another sobering fact. The longer kids stay in school, the less they seem to know about history, compared to what they should know. Thus, while 67 percent of fourth-graders and 64 percent of eighth-graders scored at or above the basic level, only 43 percent of seniors did. More American students scored below basic on the 2001 U.S. history test than on any other subject that NAEP assesses.

So what is the Department of Children, Families and Learning (CFL) doing here in Minnesota to remedy this problem? Sad to say, CFL may actually be making things worse. For years, the department has promoted the Profile of Learning, Minnesota's K-12 graduation standards, as the key to educational reform in this state.

Unfortunately, the Profile's American history standards are woefully inadequate. (National reviewing organizations have repeatedly panned them.) The problem is two-fold. First, the Profile gives short shrift to the major figures and events of American history. Under its standards, students can graduate from high school without serious exposure to central concepts of citizenship like federalism, the three branches of government and the evolution of the Constitution. A new advisory curriculum framework is likely to have little impact in the classroom.

Second, the Profile requires students to meet its standards by completing a variety of hands-on projects. These projects generally consume from one to six weeks of class time, and may require students to pretend to be explorers, or to interview others about growing up in America. In a recent study, social studies teachers reported that they have had to drop entire chapters or units (say, on the Civil War or World War I) to accommodate Profile projects. One teacher, for example, complained of being compelled to omit vital units on the executive and judicial branches of government in order to carve out time for Profile-related busywork.

Why does it matter whether Minnesota students -- and their peers elsewhere -- are well-versed in American history? Some contend, after all, that history is just a series of names and dates, with no practical application.

The truth is very different. In an important sense, students who don't know American history don't really know who they are.

Young people who are ignorant of American history do not know that they are part of a story -- an epic that is far larger than themselves. American history is the story of how "We the People" became sovereign. Many of our adolescents' most cherished assumptions about life -- for example, their sense of entitlement to freedom and individual rights -- have their source in this story. As a result, students who don't know American history don't understand why they think and believe as they do.

History is important for another reason. When students learn America's story, they come to see that they have a role in it. They see that citizenship imposes duties, and that America's future depends on how they carry out those duties. The study of history also gives young people an informed context for the decisions they will face as citizens. Those who understand the challenges of our nation's past will be well-equipped to weigh complex policy alternatives as they confront the challenges of the future.

Finally, the study of history gives young Americans a wealth of extraordinary models of character on which to draw in their personal lives. The great men and women of the past -- George Washington, James Madison, Frederick Douglass, Elizabeth Cady Stanton -- offer countless inspiring examples of virtues like courage, wisdom and perseverance.

In a world where an amoral popular culture often sets the tone, the study of history is uniquely equipped to nurture young people's moral imagination. At a time when American democracy is under sustained attack, we ignore it at our peril.

-- Katherine Kersten is a senior fellow of the Center of the American Experiment in Minneapolis.