Networking Young Citizens Blog

Hello all,

I am posting the excellent memo from Suzanne and Ariadne that kicked off our discussions a couple of weeks back

This contains the beginning of an agenda for us, and lots of issues that we can develop

There is also a plan at the end for two different types fo studies — one of schools and another of sites.

We may wish to divide the labor around this and then come together to discuss policy as a group?

– Lance

Networking Young Citizens- Draft research proposal 9th Feb, 2009
(Suzanne and Ariadne)

Preamble
In order to know more clearly what might enhance the likelihood of young people’s political/civic engagement, we need to know more about what they already know and bring to political/civic engagement/participation  activities, and how they relate to existing opportunities to engage.

The central tenet for the Networking Young Citizen’s WUN Group is that for this cohort the appeal of ICT-based participation is an additional incentive/assistance to political and civic engagement.
Thus in order to suggest what kinds of policies (including for both government and NGOs) could support enhanced political/civic engagement/participation in USA, UK and Australia we would need to collect indicative data on: young people’s experiences of and attitudes toward uses of ICT, the types of online and offline based opportunities available for civic/citizenship/political engagement/participation of young people within each national context; and a focus on a range of different environments to investigate how they encourage civic, political and digital engagement, on how constrained young people feel by existing participation models.

Research Issues
1. The distinctions between ‘civics’ and ‘citizenship’ understandings
Suzanne defines ‘civics’ as relating to knowledge of how a citizen’s system works, and ‘citizenship’ as relating to the attitudes/disposition to engage in that system, and argues research indicates that capacity in both assists in effective participation. Ariadne confirms the essential role and significant impact of ‘interest’ in particular issues in engagement/participation.
2. The operationalisation of dutiful and self actualising notions of citizenship through ICTs (from Lance and Michael’s work).
Here we have concepts that have been empirically and quantitatively examined in the US through studying existing internet based sites, but not to large extent in Australia or the UK.
3. The distinctions and interplay between understandings/knowledge and skills (digital literacy?) as they pertain to citizenship ICT-based activities.
This would be relevant in school based civics and citizenship teaching and learning and in other engagement/participation environments. We could follow up with  students who had experienced a digital C&C education program and seek to ascertain the level of impact that had the preferences they had for online participation over the more ‘dutiful’ forms of engagement advocated in conventional civics participation. We would also be interested what differences young people see as significant in different models of participation, and if/how they integrate them in their practices.
4. The distinctions between ‘policy’ and ‘policy outcomes’ are deemed important because in this project we are ostensibly suggesting that a cause and effect relationship exists, though manifestly they are interconnected and play out differently, according to the context.
We think the project would be able to advise that certain policies might have the effect of increasing young people’s engagement in a self actualising form of citizenship. [We are only going to be able to report on presumed outcomes from the participation activities we observe, but we would hope that we can hypothesise that some programs/facilities can be put in place that might/will increase the likelihood of young citizens participating]. We would hope that the project would also provide us with the opportunity to focus on how the structural policy environment shapes outcomes and opportunities for young people’s engagement, as well.

Proposed Research Methodology
1.    case studies of schools
For example, we propose locating a primary and secondary school in each of two large states (NSW & Vic) which have programs (general, or preferably Civics & Citizenship) with a strong emphasis on online delivery. These case-study schools would be visited and observed for the participation culture within the school, and how it is supported. Students in Yr 9 would be observed and surveyed with a view to getting a handle on how they learn, and how they relate online to civic knowledge, and to citizenship attitudes. We would gain considerable (albeit very small scale) indication of how the distinctions listed above play out in those schools. We would be able to report on how online cultures and programs can support student learning and attitudes to participation per se and to differing modes of participation, and also speak to the unique (or not) role of the online delivery in that participation.
2.    internet site analysis
To provide a large scale quantitative, comparative understanding of how existing sites facilitate either dutiful or self actualising citizenship styles; and an assessment of whether the sites are managed, autonomous or democratic (using Stephen’s typology) in their structural base. This would also include replication/expansion in the three countries of the experimental work Mike has been doing with young people’s use of particular sites (this would also surely relate to Sonia Livingstone’s existing research in the UK?). Thus bringing together a survey of what exists, how we would examine it contextually, and the dimension of what young people do and their attitudes towards engagement.
3.    policy analysis (two-fold)
First: provide a thorough comparative background on the existing policy context (building on Kathryn’s work) in the three places for both approaches to C&C learning and digital engagement . This would include documentary analysis and interviews with policy makers.
Second: based on all of the above, to create a model for facilitating self-actualising, democratic citizenship through both school and online environments.

Is ‘youth’ a self-explanatory term? I suspect not. Perhaps we need to clarify the age range that interests us in this research – nd why upper and lower cut-offs seem to be right.

Stephen

In our recent telephone conference we agreed to ue the blog to chew over some of the key conceptual categories that we plan to explore in our research. I suggest we kick off with basic concepts such as Citizenship, Youth, Web 2.0 and Learning. I shall set up first posts on each of these and see if we can work towards some agreed meanings.

Stephen

What do we mean by Citizenship?

Is it a set of practices – a legal condition – a cultural condition – a normative aspiration?

Of course, it might be a hybrid of all these. But does the concept change when it describes pre-voters – or people who do not possess the full legal rights of adults?

Stephen