Youth Change Agents: Comparing the Sociopolitical Identities of Youth Organizers and Youth Commissioners

Although youth have long been at the forefront of social change, the last two decades have seen an upsurge in the number of organizations, agencies, and governmental bodies dedicated to supporting the idea of youth voice in public policy. Drawing on in-depth individual interviews with 32 youth in one major urban center, this study compares how participation in differently positioned political activities influences participants’ sociopolitical identities and their views of the most effective mechanisms for social change. Specifically, this research compares youth involved in a government-sanctioned youth commission, developed to advise policymakers, with youth involved in a community-based youth organizing group, focused on fighting for educational reform. The study explores similarities and differences in the two sets of participants’ civic commitments, sense of agency, and beliefs about the process of social change

Promoting Social Justice through Service-Learning in Urban Teacher Education: The Role of Student Voice

Although service-learning is becoming more common in teacher education programs (Anderson & Erickson 2003), few detailed case descriptions show how service-learning can help to promote a social justice orientation for prospective teachers. A comparative descriptive analysis of projects within two teacher preparation programs--one focused on training undergraduates and one focused on training graduate students--illustrates how service-learning, when undergirded by student voice work, prepares prospective educators to teach for social justice in urban classrooms. We identify commonalities in our two approaches to integrating service-learning and student voice into the teacher education curriculum, and we show how our distinctive efforts support prospective teachers in developing the relationships, reflections, and practices they need to become effective educators of urban youth

The Role of Electoral Engagement in Youth Social Movements - Study I of "Protests, Politics, and Power: Exploring the Connections Between Youth Voting and Youth Movements"

Youth activism and participation in social movements has been one of the defining features of civic life in the past several years: from the anti-gun violence protests after the Parkland school shooting in 2018, to the nationwide actions for racial justice following George Floyd's murder in 2020. Both of those were also election years in which young people achieved historic or near-historic levels of voter turnout. But what, exactly, was the relationship between young people's participation in the streets and at the ballot box?To answer that question, the Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE) joined a team of researchers to produce Protests, Politics, and Power: Exploring the Connections Between Youth Voting and Youth Movements. This research encompasses two studies that tackled this question with different but complementary perspectives and approaches. The Role of Electoral Engagement in Youth Social Movements is a qualitative study based on interviews and supplemental surveys with young leaders and participants in social movements. The second study, Quantifying the Effects of Protests on Voter Registration and Turnout, uses quantitative methods to study changes in electoral participation in areas where protests took place

A Systematic Reveiw of Student Self-Report Instruments That Assess Student-Teacher Relationships

Background: A large body of survey-based research asserts that the quality and strength of student-teacher relationships (STRs) predict a host of academic and nonacademic outcomes; however, advances in survey design research have led some to question existing survey instruments’ psychometric soundness. Concurrently, qualitative research on STRs has identified important developmental and sociocultural variation in the ways students define, understand, and react to relationships with their teachers. The questions raised by survey methodologists, together with the conceptual elaboration of STRs, suggest that survey instruments used to assess STRs are due for a systematic review. Purpose/Research Questions: This review of survey instruments examines the strengths and shortcomings of existing measures of STRs. Specifically, we ask: How do student self-report survey instruments assess STRs? We examined the extent to which these instruments reflect current survey design principles and existing knowledge about how STRs work, particularly for adolescents. Research Design, Data Collection, and Analysis: A systematic search of peer-reviewed journal articles that (a) focused on North American middle- or high-school students, (b) linked STRs to student outcomes, and (c) used a student-report measure of STRs yielded 66 studies for which we could obtain the full instrument. Instruments were analyzed using a literature-informed protocol and an iterative process that resulted in strong inter-rater agreement. We used tables and matrices to examine patterns, themes, and outliers in our coded data. Findings: The 66 studies varied considerably with respect to how they operationalized STRs and how they addressed the validity of their instruments. Similar survey items were used to measure different constructs, and constructs with the same names were measured inconsistently across studies. Many instruments were limited by (a) items that included words with ambiguous meanings, (b) inconsistent identification of instruments’ focal students and teachers across instruments, and (c) the use of negatively worded items to measure STRs’ strength. Conclusions and Recommendations: If STR research is to meet its promise to guide and inform teachers’ efforts to develop and sustain effective relationships with their students, the field needs to properly identify those behaviors that make a difference for different students and those that do not. The next generation of student-report STR survey instruments requires more stringent attention to construct specification and validity, as well as to item generation (specifically, language use), in order to most effectively measure and identify aspects of STRs that affect student performance and well-being

Pesquisa que envolve a comunidadeatravés das lentes do fechamento escolar: Oportunidades, desafios, contribuições e perguntas persistentes

This article expands upon and problematizes the practice of community-engaged research (CES) through the lens of school closings. Rather than employ a one-dimensional view of CES that portrays university researchers and community partners as collaborating equally on all stages of the research, we suggest a broader, more flexible understanding that incorporates various contextual factors. Drawing on local examples, from New York City and Baltimore, and one national effort to resist school closings, we  present three forms of CES: participatory action research (PAR), in which university researchers and community partners collaboratively engaged in almost all aspects of the process; the engaged learner, in which the researcher documented a community organizing campaign with the full support of the campaign organizers; and a grassroots listening project implemented without university partners. In each case, participants had to navigate the thorny issues of power differentials, race and racism, ownership and voice, and presentation and representation. Difficulties notwithstanding, CES has made important contributions to both the literature on and practice of school closings. We conclude the article with a discussion of some of the lingering tensions that characterize community-engaged scholarship.Este artículo expande y problematiza la práctica de la investigación que compromete a la comunidad. (CES) a través del lente del cierre de escuelas. En lugar de emplear una visión unidimensional del CES que describe a los investigadores universitarios y socios comunitarios como colaboradores en todas las etapas de la investigación, sugerimos una comprensión más amplia y flexible que incorpore varios factores contextuales. A partir de ejemplos locales, de la ciudad de Nueva York y Baltimore, y de un esfuerzo nacional para resistir el cierre de escuelas, presentamos tres formas de CES: investigación de acción participativa (PAR), en la que investigadores universitarios y socios comunitarios colaboran en casi todos los aspectos de la proceso; el participante comprometido, en el que el investigador documentó una campaña de organización comunitaria con el apoyo total de los organizadores de la campaña; y un proyecto implementado sin socios universitarios. En cada caso, los participantes tuvieron que navegar por los espinosos problemas de los diferenciales de poder, la raza y el racismo, la propiedad y la voz, y la presentación y representación. A pesar de las dificultades, el CES ha hecho importantes contribuciones a la literatura y la práctica del cierre de escuelas. Concluimos el artículo con una discusión de algunas de las tensiones persistentes que caracterizan a los investigacións que compromete a la comunidad. Este artigo expande e problematiza a prática de pesquisa que envolve a comunidade (CES) através das lentes do fechamento escolar. Em vez de usar uma visão unidimensional do CES que descreve os pesquisadores da universidade e os parceiros da comunidade como parceiros em todas as etapas da pesquisa, sugerimos um entendimento mais amplo e flexível que incorpora vários fatores contextuais. A partir de exemplos locais, de Nova York e Baltimore, e de um esforço nacional para resistir ao fechamento de escolas, apresentamos três formas de CES: pesquisa de ação participativa (PAR), na qual pesquisadores universitários e parceiros da comunidade colaboram. em quase todos os aspectos do processo; o participante comprometido, no qual o pesquisador documentou uma campanha de organização comunitária com o total apoio dos organizadores da campanha; e um projeto implementado sem parceiros universitários. Em cada caso, os participantes tiveram que navegar pelos espinhosos problemas de diferenciais de poder, raça e racismo, propriedade e voz, e apresentação e representação. Apesar das dificuldades, o CES fez contribuições importantes para a literatura e a prática do fechamento de escolas. Concluímos o artigo com uma discussão sobre algumas das tensões persistentes que caracterizam os pesquisa que envolve a comunidade

School Inequality: Challenges and Solutions

“Welcome Remarks” were given by Wendy Collins Perdue, Dean of the University of Richmond School of Law, and Dr. Ronald Crutcher, President of the University of Richmond. (9:05 a.m.–9:15 a.m.) “Keynote” by Catherine Lhamon, U.S. Department of Education Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights. (9:15 a.m.–10:00 a.m.) “State-Level School Finance Panel” by Kimberly Robinson, Professor of Law at the University of Richmond School of Law; David Hinojosa, National Director of Policy with the Intercultural Development Research Association (IDRA); and Molly Hunter, Director of the Education Law Center’s Educational Justice program. (10:00 a.m.–11:10 a.m.) “Innovation in Addressing School Inequality Panel” by Lisa Scruggs, Partner with Duane Morris, LLP; Javaid Siddiqi, Director of Hunt-Kean Leadership Fellows at the Hunt Institute; and Jerusha Conner, Associate Professor and Graduate Education Program Coordinator at Villanova University, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. (11:10 a.m.–12:20 p.m.) “School Discipline Panel” by Jason Nance, Associate Professor of Law and the Associate Director for Education Law and Policy at the Center on Children and Families at the University of Florida Levin College of Law; Marilyn Armour, a University Distinguished Teaching Professor and Director of the Institute for Restorative Justice and Restorative Dialogue at the University of Texas at Austin School of Social Work; Pamela Meanes, Partner at Thompson Coburn LLP and former President of the National Bar Association; and Meredith Harbach, Professor of Law at the University of Richmond School of Law. (1:20 p.m.–2:30 p.m.) Finally, a debate on the role the federal government should hold in the governance of public education featured Preston Green III, the John and Carla Klein Professor of Urban Education and Professor of Educational Leadership and Law at the University of Connecticut (arguing in favor of the federal government having an increased role) and Gerard Robinson, Resident Fellow of Educational Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute (arguing against). (2:30 p.m.–3:30 p.m.