An Exploration of Solidarity and Allyship in Youth Leadership Councils

• In Event: Power, Intersectionality, and Solidarity Within Youth and Community Organizing

Abstract

This paper examines how youth leadership councils (YLC) situated within the New York City Department of Education (NYCDOE) address power and identity toward allyship. NYC is the most ethnically diverse school district in the country, yet the most segregated (Kirkland & Sanzone, 2017). The Borough Student Advisory Councils (BSAC) are YLCs that exist for students to collectively address educational inequities. This institutional or “inside” organization is similar to “outside” spaces such as grassroots organizations in terms of leadership development but are less known for activism. The research questions are: Within YLCs, how do youth learn about power, oppression and intersectionality? How do youth learn from each other to work together in aims of solidarity to improve education for the collective?

The study takes up Ginwright and Cammarota’s (2002) Social Justice Youth Development Framework (SJYD), rooted in Freire’s critical consciousness where youth use their agency to push for social change. SJYD is rooted in three levels of awareness, 1) the self, 2) social, and 3) global- that respectively guide identity development, political education, and connection to others’ struggles. These levels of awareness theoretically lead to outcomes such as critical thinking, self esteem, and critical empathy that helps youth think about intersectional coalition building.

The data for this study come from a larger mixed methods longitudinal study. The researchers study three cohorts to examine change over time, and account for attrition. This paper analyzes qualitative data from 15 youth, which include 4 interviews, 6 focus groups, observations and document review of two racially diverse BSACS over three years. Protocols centered on youth participation; perceived support; and critical consciousness components guided by the SJYD framework. Data analysis consisted of identifying correlations between demographic factors and outcomes, and through delineating relationships among participation and critical consciousness.

We found that this “inside” youth leadership space did not inherently establish all of the principles of Ginwright’s SJYD framework, significantly, political education. Adult facilitators were not trained to lead sessions regarding power or oppression. Rarely were issues such as racism, sexism, and homophobia formally discussed during BSAC meetings. However, this space did bring together students of various backgrounds that would not normally meet given the hypersegregation of NYC schools. Given this context, white, privileged students noted that they began to recognize their own privilege when they worked with BIPOC students who went to schools that were under-resourced. This fueled a more passionate response from the youth toward educational equity and solidarity across youth.

This paper negotiates how “inside” spaces lack what “outside” youth spaces have in terms of political education, but also how youth organically develop a sense of intersectional solidarity when given the opportunity to be in integrated spaces. With ongoing demonstrations across the country in response to the continued state violence against Black communities, adults may seek the tools to foster critical consciousness instead of being satisfied with “neutral” or apolitical spaces. Implementing SJYD in “inside” spaces may foster sociopolitical skills and a sense of agency for students participating in YLCs that moves toward educational equity.

Authors

• Lindsey Foster, New York University

• Hui-Ling S. Malone, Michigan State University

• Elise M. Harris, New York University