Service, community engagement, advocacy and activists.

[Boyd Roberts]

In our work with young people, it is important that we are ourselves reflective, in the way that we encourage them to be. So here are a few of the things relating to the
Award that I have been reflecting on over the last few weeks. Agree? Disagree?
Please share your own views or respond to what's here.

Since the summer we have seen groups of people “occupying” various locations around the world to register discontent at the current economic situation, at bankers’ bonuses, excessive profits, the degradation of the planet and the disparities between the rich and poor. I took time in London to visit the Occupy London camp near St Paul’s Cathedral in the central financial district. Around two hundred protesters are encamped in tents outside the cathedral. 

A number of people have commented that these protest movements which have arisen in a number of countries are clear about what they are against, but not what they are for.
Judging by some of the posters and notices I saw this is not fair or accurate. Although there are slogans against capitalism, excessive profits and greed, other signs and notices are for fairness in distributing wealth and resources, for respect for the environment and for the elimination of poverty. Occupy London operates as a collective democracy, with decisions taken by general assemblies - meetings of all the people living there. At one such meeting they agreed the following resolution, which I saw in a hand written poster on one of the surrounding buildings:

“We want structural change towards real equality.

The world’s resources must go towards caring for people and the planet, not the military,
corporate profits or the rich.”

                Occupy London General Assembly  16 October 2011

An admirable sentiment, I would have thought.

Most of the protesters are young people – perhaps in their late teens or twenties. And some people have said that the weakness of the occupations around the world is that
they do not propose solutions, and therefore what is their point?

What does this have to do with the International Global Citizen’s Award? 

It got me thinking about how young people should relate to the great global challenges we now face.

It does not seem reasonable to expect young people to have the answers. Many of the
challenges f acing us seem to defeat older people in positions of considerable power and influence - as European politicians grappling with the challenges of the Eurozone certainly demonstrate. And of course most of the challenges are not of young people’s making, but come from the activities of people of our and former generations. But young people, including the protesters, often see things with a passion and clarity that can diminish as we get older. They can focus our minds and attention on some important issues and simple truths that we can sometimes lose sight of. Although the young protesters in London are relatively few in number, they have managed to turn the attention of the country – and beyond - to some of the issues they are concerned with.

 It may not be possible for young people to produce large scale change themselves, at least not while they are young. But their perspective, if we encourage it to be expressed and pay attention to it,  of can be important in helping to shift views and perspectives in society, and towards providing conditions in which those with more power and influence can take difficult decisions to make the world a better place.  And of course those with influence and power were young once, and we might hope that some people who, when young, wish to see change for the better will be able to directly bring about that
change later in their lives.  Hence the importance of Advocacy, persuasion or
promotion in the Award.

 

But what about other forms of action to address the global issues more directly? Some
schemes to engage young people in global issues lay claim to getting young people to do just that - to address the issue themselves. This can be admirable where it is possible, but in some situations it can be unrealistic, even immodest in its claims, and gives people the idea that things are simple, when they are not, and can be simply remedied, which they cannot. 

We don’t want young people to feel powerless, but nor do we want them to develop a simple minded view that they can put things right themselves by their own actions. We
need to promote – in them as in ourselves – an optimistic approach which combines
taking action with realistic humility. The personal global footprint component
of the IGC Award deliberately focuses on those aspects of a young person’s life
where they have impact on the life of others and the environment simply by
their daily life and activities, and the choices they make online or in the
shops or mall. They (and we) are taking actions with consequences simply by
being alive. The Award encourages them to become more aware of this, to find
out and reflect on some of the underlying facts that relate to their lifestyle
and activities, and, if they wish to do so, to make some changes and take some positive
action as a result.

 

But while this is important, it is not enough in itself. In schools we often talk about “service” to describe actions by individuals to benefit the community – and we should not
forget the environment too. And of course, “Personal Community Service” is another component of the IGC Award, forming part of the section “Influence and involvement
with others” – which in general is an essential aspect of citizenship at all levels from the local to the global.

The term “service” is widely used in the school context, and it was partly because there are often service programmes and activities in schools that it seemed a good idea specifically to incorporate and give recognition to students’ work in these within the IGC
Award framework. But the term “service” has some associated difficulties. In
some contexts “service” becomes synonymous with community engagement, as though
the only way people can be involved in their communities is through “service”.  There are many types of engagement, from paying taxes honestly, to voting in elections, to standing for elected office, or volunteering in a community home or in an environmental project. While volunteering would be regarded as “service” and serving a community in an elected capacity would probably also be considered service, even if it is paid,
the other examples would not. Yet they are important forms of community
engagement, arguably at least as important as spending a few hours volunteering. And the emphasis on “community” focuses on service to human communities, when service should also embrace work to benefit other species and the environment.

 

Cathryn Berger-Kaye, who has much experience of “service learning”, distinguishes four
types of service:

• Direct service, in which students provide a benefit  to another person face-to-face,
  e.g. tutoring a young child
• Indirect service – which benefits the community
  or the environment, but does not involve face-to-face work providing benefit to
  another individual, e.g. restoring a habitat, fund-raising
• Advocacy – creating awareness of or promoting
  action on an issue of public interest, e.g. writing letters, public speaking
• Research – finding, gathering and reporting on information in the public interest, e.g. undertaking an ecological survey. 

(Kaye, C.B (2011) The Complete Guide to Service Learning. Free Spirit Publishing, Minneapolis, MN, USA)

Kaye’s helpful classification is broader than that used by some people –
which seems welcome.

But as soon as we talk about “service” we can get bogged down in what it
is – and what it is not. I think that the term itself may cause such
difficulties. In a piece I wrote as part of The Changing Face on International Education (edited by George Walker, published by IB earlier this year) I talked more generally about “community engagement” of which “service” forms only a part. 

In the context of the IGC Award, I would suggest that we have a rather
broad understanding of “Personal Community Service” – which certainly embraces
actions to benefit the environment, and might incorporate elements that fall
outside Berger-Kaye’s classification. And perhaps we might change the term?
What do you think?  Would another term be better?

In “service”, or more generally in all forms of community engagement and
action, what seems important is that actions undertaken are accompanied by
finding out more about the issues involved. If students take action without
getting to understand more about the importance of their actions, and what issues
they are addressing, then they are simply providing labour. That does not seem
to be appropriate in an educational context. For this reason, research
underpins action in the IGC Award.

Fund-raising is often undertaken in schools and can be very valuable in
supporting important work undertaken by others. But unless it is accompanied by
students finding out about the causes they are supporting, then it can simply
be an excuse to eat cakes at bake sales, or to have a good time with friends at
a fund-raising disco. 

Kaye recognises advocacy as one aspect of service – which is welcome. It also seems particularly appropriate for young people, who can often be passionate about causes, and whose sharing of their passion and commitment seems admirable. In the IGC
Award, advocacy, persuasion or promotion are given separate billing, to give emphasis but also recognising that they would fall outside some people’s understanding of service.

While “service” as a term has some strengths, it can have implicit assumptions of uneven relationships, which seems unfortunate in some contexts, and can reinforce notions of “helping” rather than working alongside others in a partnership of mutual benefit – of “doing things for” rather than “doing things with” recipients. This is behind the general concerns which a number of people are now expressing about some service projects undertaken by students in schools and universities, particularly, in developing countries. Chris Charleson, head of Sotogrande International School in Spain (which has offered the IGCAward since the outset) told me some years ago that they talk of “solidarity”
in their context.

In the Award, significantly, personal community service is part of Influence and involvement with others.  It is only one aspect of working with or alongside others.  Influence and involvement with others gives emphasis and requires participants
to share in decision-making as well as to engage in advocacy, persuasion or promotion. There are often opportunities for decision-making in different contexts in school, and outside. Within the Award framework, all types of participation in decision-making are encouraged and recognised.  Taking part in decision-making is an essential attribute of the good citizen – at all levels from the school to the global. The decision-making element in the Award is not tied in with global issues – it is a general and important skill that can be developed in many contexts.  Taking part in decisions with global implications may take place within the context of the Award programme for some participants, or it may come later in their lives – but influenced by their experience in other contexts as part of the Award.

 

Although the Award is the International Global Citizen’s Award, there is no expectation
that any of the activities forming part of it are undertaken in other countries. A good global citizen is a good member of their own community first. We cannot be globally good and locally indifferent. Research and thinking are indicating that it is often most beneficial for young people to have experience of and to learn from community engagement within one of their own local communities – their school, neighbourhood, town or another location in their own country. And work locally can of course have global implications and be seen in a global context, when undertaken with what Harriet Marshall of Bath University calls a “global gaze”. Certainly there are challenges and difficulties working in an alien community abroad where people may not speak the language and will not be familiar with important cultural considerations.

One final thought. According to the UN there are now 7 billion people on the planet. It’s great that medical advances are reducing deaths and prolonging lives. But as the human population reaches ever higher levels, it does raise issues. There must be concerns about resources – their actual overall levels and their distribution, - about the age distribution
and demography in the human population,  – and about how other plant and animal species fit into our increasingly crowded planet – particularly in the wild in their own
natural habitats rather than in captivity or cultivation. As the world’s population
passes this significant milestone it seems important for us to take opportunities
with young people to consider its implications – if not specifically within the
Award programme, elsewhere.

Lots of issues here. Do react, or share any views or ideas of your own below.

“