Tensions in Scaling Social Justice Youth Leadership Across a Large District

• In Event: Marriott Roundtable Session 25
  In Roundtable Session: Engaging Students in Systems Change: Embracing Multiple Research-Practice Partnership Stakeholders in Transformative Student Voice Work

Abstract

Purposes
Urban public school systems in the United States occupy a contradictory space for youth and educators committed to transformative, social justice aims: they simultaneously limit the agency and power of students and teachers, while also being a key point of educational access for millions of youth. This paper describes a research practice partnership developed to study and scale a social justice student leadership program in ways that protect the program’s core commitments to transformative student voice. The purpose of this paper, coauthored by the two members of the research team and the program director, is to identify lessons learned about scaling a district sponsored program that raises awareness about injustices and catalyzes student engagement in policy change.

Framework
We look at scaling through a social justice lens. Specifically, how do processes of scaling change when the innovation being scale challenges relations of power? Renee et al.’s (2009) concept of the zone of mediation, which refers to the idea that barriers to equity-centered change are not merely technical, but are also cultural and political, informs our approach.

Methods
We draw on one year of qualitative fieldwork in ten high schools. Data include monthly classroom observations, interviews with students and adult facilitators, field notes from bi-weekly coaches meetings, and student-generated artifacts (e.g., policy proposals). Analysis took place in bi-weekly research team meetings and then systematic review of data after the data had been uploaded to Dedoose.

Findings

Adult capacity for student partnership. Most school adults (leadership and teachers) struggled to work in partnership with students. School principals and district leaders were not accustomed to viewing student leaders as partners in school change; follow-through on youth policy proposals was the exception rather than the rule. Also, teachers sought support around cultivating student voice and agency in their classrooms, particularly those with privileged identities who grappled with their role in contributing to both the oppression and liberation of youth.

The risk of schoolification. Program goals prioritize student leadership learning and social justice policy change at the school or district level. But, as the RPP team sought to spread the program to more classroom teachers, initial feedback from district leaders reframed the project as a vehicle for student learning and minimized the elements that prioritized student participation in systems change. In this sense, TSV activities were at risk of becoming “schoolified.”

Context. Two major events occurred which had unintended consequences to our scaling efforts: the selection of a new superintendent and a teacher union strike. Students leveraged their action civics learning to publicly respond to these events as they occurred in real time. Additionally, youth used their platform to call attention to how their voices were excluded from the formal decision making process in these high-stakes issues.

Significance
Findings will be useful for those RPPs that adopt a political stance towards their work in public school districts and aim to study and support stakeholders from marginalized backgrounds in educational planning and decision-making. We also discuss implications for coaching students in how to push for change in their schools.

Authors

• Ben Kirshner, University of Colorado - Boulder

• Ginnie Logan, University of Colorado - Boulder

• Solicia Lopez, Denver Public Schools