|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-03-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Adolescents; Foreign Countries; Social Control; Democracy; Young Adults; Political Power; Activism; Citizen Participation; Advisory Committees; Qualitative Research; Politics; Criticism; Socialization
Abstract:
This article provides a critical examination of a common form of adult attempts to promote civic engagement among young people, namely, youth advisory councils. While youth councils have been widely celebrated as an effective way to integrate young people into political processes, little research has explored why some politically active youth choose to leave, or refuse to join, youth councils. Based on two qualitative studies of politically active teens throughout North and Latin America, the authors argue that teenage activists possess valuable dissident knowledge of, and critical perspectives on, the potential for youth advisory councils to promote youth political power. We argue that young activists understand democracy in ways that are fundamentally different from that offered to them by youth councils. Youth activists put forth a theory of democracy that emphasizes authority and impact, not just voice; they understand democracy as representing collective concerns and perceive youth councils as elitist and nonrepresentative; and they emphasize the value of controversy and contentious politics while expressing anxiety that youth councils can function as modes of social control that tame and channel youth dissent, rather than opportunities to foster youth political power.
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
Author(s): |
Tammi, Tuure |
Source: |
Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, v8 n1 p73-86 Mar 2013 |
|
Pub Date: |
2013-03-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Action Research; Teaching Methods; Research Projects; International Studies; Democracy; Classroom Techniques; Foreign Countries; Political Attitudes; Elementary School Students; Teacher Attitudes; Reflection; Student Participation; Teacher Role
Abstract:
Finnish youth are found to be, despite their broad knowledge, uninterested in politics and in societal participation. As a remedy, international studies suggest enabling democratic experiences in schools. This article discusses an action research project aimed at developing deliberation-based democratic practice in an elementary classroom. Results suggest that the formal deliberative-democratic practice opens up a way for pupils to productively express themselves, challenge the prevailing structures, make sense of social reality and, thus, practise skills and motivations needed in democratic citizenship. However, the teacher is argued to be in constant struggle between deliberative-democratic stance and control orientation. This tension exists in the teacher's actions and thinking and in his reflections about the contrast between the classroom practice and the overall school ethos. Therefore, this article suggests using the understanding of this tension in scrutinizing projects aiming at pupil participation and involvement.
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-00-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Higher Education; Profiles; Student Attitudes; Measures (Individuals); Foreign Countries; Content Analysis; Urban Areas; Semi Structured Interviews; Equal Education; Democracy; Access to Education; Qualitative Research
Abstract:
Background: An equitable and democratised higher education system should, in principle, be permeable to the flow of populations with different social and/or cultural backgrounds, allowing access to any parts of the system. However, despite the democratisation efforts that took place in Portugal after the 1974 revolution, and although the student population is now much more diversified and heterogeneous than ever before, the particular routes to higher education still hinder the free access of students to some areas of the system. Purpose: In this study, those different routes to higher education and the way they might influence students' choices are analysed. Of particular interest was whether students tended to make choices based on feasibility rather than personal preference. Sample: Data were collected through individual semi-structured interviews with 60 first year students (32 female and 28 male), from universities and polytechnics, both public and private, and from three first cycle study programmes (Arts, Pharmacy and Computer Engineering) in the urban area of the city of Porto. Design and Methods: The analysis was a small scale qualitative investigation of Portuguese students' perceptions underlying their choices in higher education. The sample selection took into account the diversity of the student population and sought to include different student profiles to gather contrasting cases and potentially contrasting views. Data gathered through interviews (conducted in 2009/2010) were systematised by means of a content analysis technique and submitted to a codification process according to a grid of categories that emerged from the analysis of data. Results: Findings from this small scale exploration suggest that the majority of the students interviewed chose a study programme based on preference but based their choice of institution on feasibility. Conclusions: The study provides insights into factors that limit student access to all parts of the higher education system, namely to some selective and more prestigious institutions. (Contains 1 table, 2 figures and 1 note.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-02-04 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Evaluative |
Peer Reviewed: |
|
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Freedom of Speech; Democracy; Constitutional Law; Political Attitudes; Court Litigation; Terrorism; Civil Rights; College Faculty; Academic Freedom
Abstract:
For years, libertarians had fought laws and policies barring Communists from teaching as direct assaults on the First Amendment, while supporters of loyalty programs had painted all Communists as mental slaves of Moscow. In 1952 the Supreme Court upheld New York's 1949 Feinberg Law, which required detailed procedures for investigating the loyalty of every public-school teacher and ousting anyone who had engaged in "treasonable or seditious acts or utterances" or joined an organization that advocated the overthrow of the government by "force, violence, or any unlawful means." It was a typical cold-war-era loyalty law; hence, "Adler v. Board of Education," the Supreme Court's 1952 decision upholding it, had nationwide repercussions. In "Adler," a majority of the court found no First Amendment problem with the Feinberg Law. Embracing the anti-Communist fervor of the time, the court said that teachers had no right to their jobs; and because they worked "in a sensitive area" where they shaped young minds, the authorities were entitled to investigate their political beliefs. Even at that unfortunate moment for free speech, however, the court was not unanimous. Fifteen years later, in 1967, "Adler" was overturned by the ruling on "Keyishian v. Board of Regents," which rejected the idea that restrictions on expression, ideas, and political associations are permissible under the First Amendment as conditions of public employment. Battles over free speech on the campus continue to bedevil the national politics. Today's war on terrorism has replaced anti-Communism as a justification for limiting civil liberties, both on the campus and off. Professors' free-speech rights are no greater than everybody else's. But their special task in furthering democracy requires protections.
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-00-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Descriptive |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Critical Theory; Democracy; Political Attitudes; Government (Administrative Body); Citizenship; Middle Class; Whites; Anxiety; Television; Communication (Thought Transfer); Empowerment; Disadvantaged
Abstract:
For many communication scholars, critical pedagogy has proven a valuable teaching approach intended to strengthen democracy and empower the disenfranchised. However, the pedagogical practice becomes problematic when employed as a way to help the already enfranchised maintain their privileged position. This is the very problem posed by the conservative radio and television personality Glenn Beck. As we argue here, Beck routinely used techniques associated with critical pedagogy to encourage his primarily white, middle-class audience to feel disenfranchised by their own government and a liberal intellectual elite. Instead of encouraging democratic engagement, Beck urged his audience toward antagonistic relations anathema to democracy. His ability to do this encourages us to rethink the practice of critical pedagogy as a public modality, which is to emphasize its democratic political goals. In the end, we argue that Beck's ability to ape critical pedagogy for undemocratic ends should remind communication scholars of the importance of both stasis and materiality in their own practices of critical pedagogy and scholarship.
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-03-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Books; Reports - Descriptive |
Peer Reviewed: |
|
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Youth; African American Children; Democracy; Correctional Institutions; Masculinity; Literacy; Racial Factors; Males
Abstract:
This beautifully written book argues that educators need to understand the social worlds and complex literacy practices of African-American males in order to pay the increasing educational debt we owe all youth and break the school-to-prison pipeline. Moving portraits from the lives of six friends bring to life the structural characteristics and qualities of meaning-making practices, particularly practices that reveal the political tensions of defining who gets to be literate and who does not. Key chapters on language, literacy, race, and masculinity examine how the literacies, languages, and identities of these friends are shaped by the silences of societal denial. Ultimately, "A Search Past Silence" is a passionate call for educators to listen to the silenced voices of Black youth and to re-imagine the concept of being literate in a multicultural democratic society.
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|