This study investigates teacher participation in a national online youth civic letter writing project through the lens of teacher civic commitments. Drawing on in-depth interviews and survey data from teachers who participated in the Letters to the Next President 2.0 project, civic commitments are articulated through civic beliefs, learning goals, instructional enactments, and geopolitical context. With a generic shared belief in “youth voice,” teachers enacted the civic letter writing project through instructional activities that included (a) choice of topic, (b) publication, (c) reading letters from other youth, (d) research, (e) peer dialogue, and (f) connections beyond the Letters project. While beliefs appeared widely shared, divergence in learning goals and enactments led to distinct learning opportunities for students. With minimal research exploring the role of teachers in student civics learning, this study provides new insights to guide teacher preparation and ongoing teacher development in the realm of civics education.
AllenD. (2016). Education and equality. University of Chicago Press.
2.
AndersonC.AveryP. G.PedersonP. V.SmithE. S.SullivanJ. L. (1997). Divergent perspectives on citizenship education: A Q-method study and survey of social studies teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 34(2), 333–364. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312034002333
3.
AppleM. W. (1993). What post-modernists forget: Cultural capital and official knowledge. Curriculum Studies, 1(3), 301–316.
4.
ClayK. L.RubinB. C. (2020). “I look deep into this stuff because it’s a part of me”: Toward a critically relevant civics education. Theory & Research in Social Education, 48(2), 161–181.
5.
CohenC.KahneJ.MarshallJ. (2018). Let’s go there: Race, ethnicity and a lived civics approach to civics education. GenForward, University of Chicago.
6.
EmersonR. M.FretzR. I.ShawL. L. (2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. University of Chicago Press.
FivesH.BuehlM. M. (2012). Spring cleaning for the “messy” construct of teachers’ beliefs: What are they? Which have been examined? What can they tell us? In HarrisK. R.GrahamS.UrdanT. (Eds.), APA educational psychology handbook: Vol. 2. Individual Differences and cultural and contextual factors (pp. 471–499). American Psychological Association.
9.
GarciaA. (2019). A call for healing teachers: Loss, ideological unraveling, and the healing gap. Schools: Studies in Education, 16(1), 64–83. https://doi.org/10.1086/702839
10.
GarciaA.LevinsonA. M.GargroetziE. C. (2020). “Dear future president of the United States”: Analyzing youth civic writing within the 2016 letters to the next president project. American Educational Research Journal, 57(3), 1159–1202. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831219870129
HessD.McAvoyP. (2015). The political classroom: Ethics and evidence in democratic education. Routledge.
13.
KahneJ. E.MiddaughE. (2008). Democracy for some: The civic opportunity gap in high school (Circle Working Paper No. 59). Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement.
14.
KahneJ. E.SporteS. E. (2008). Developing citizens: The impact of civic learning opportunities on students’ commitment to civic participation. American Educational Research Journal, 45(3), 738–766.
15.
Ladson-BillingsG. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34(3), 159–165.
16.
LampertM. (1985). How do teachers manage to teach? Perspectives on problems in practice. Harvard Educational Review, 55(2), 178–195.
17.
LatifM. M. A. (2020). Writing motivation research, measurement and pedagogy. Routledge.
18.
LevinsonM. (2010). The civic empowerment gap: Defining the problem and locating solutions. In SherrodL.Torney-PurtaJ.FlanaganC. A. (Eds.), Handbook of research on civic engagement (pp. 331–361). Wiley.
19.
LowhamE. A.LowhamJ. R. (2015). Civic meanings: Understanding the constellations of democratic and civic beliefs of educators. Democracy & Education, 23(1), Article 1.
20.
MadkinsT. C.McKinney de RoystonM. (2019). Illuminating political clarity in culturally relevant science instruction. Science Education, 103(6), 1319–1346.
21.
MirraN. (2018). Educating for empathy: Literacy learning and civic engagement. Teachers College Press.
22.
MirraN.GarciaA. (2017). Civic participation reimagined: Youth interrogation and innovation in the multimodal public sphere. Review of Research in Education, 41(March), 136–158. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X17690121
23.
MitchellA.GottfriedJ.MatsaK. E. (2015). Millennials and political news. Pew Research Center.
24.
MorozovE. (2011). The net delusion: How not to liberate the world. Penguin.
25.
MuijsD.ReynoldsD. (2002). Teachers’ beliefs and behaviors: What really matters?The Journal of Classroom Interaction, 37(2), 3–15.
26.
NasirN. S.KirshnerB. (2003). The cultural construction of moral and civic identities. Applied Developmental Science, 7(3), 138–147.
27.
National Assessment of Educational Progress [NAEP] (2014). The nation’s eeport card: 2014 civics assessment. National Center for Education Statistics, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.
28.
ParisD.AlimH. S. (2014). What are we seeking to sustain through culturally sustaining pedagogy? A loving critique forward. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.1.982l873k2ht16m77
29.
PayneK. A.JournellW. (2019). “We have those kinds of conversations here . . .”: Addressing contentious politics with elementary students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 79, 73–82.
30.
PolmanJ. L. (2012). Trajectories of participation and identification in learning communities involving disciplinary practices. In Yun DaiD. (Ed.), Design research on learning and thinking in educational settings: Enhancing intellectual growth and functioning (pp. 225–242). Routledge.
31.
PolmanJ. L.StamatisK.BoardmanA.GarciaA. (2018). Authentic to whom and what? The role of authenticity in project-based learning in English language arts. International Society of the Learning Sciences.
32.
RubinB. C. (2007). “There’s still not justice”: Youth civic identity development amid distinct school and community contexts. Teachers College Record, 109(2), 449–481.
33.
SaldañaJ. (2011). Fundamentals of qualitative research. Oxford University Press.
34.
Torney-PurtaJ.VermeerS. (2006). Developing citizenship competencies from kindergarten through grade 12: Knowledge, skills, dispositions: A background paper for policymakers and educators. Education Commission of the States (ECS).
35.
VossoughiS.DavisN. R.JacksonA.EchevarriaR.MuñozA.EscudéM. (2021). Beyond the binary of adult versus child centered learning: Pedagogies of joint activity in the context of making. Cognition and Instruction, 39(3), 211–241.
36.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
37.
WestheimerJ.KahneJ. (2004). What kind of citizen? The politics of educating for democracy. American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 237–269. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312041002237
38.
WigginsG. P.WigginsG.McTigheJ. (2005). Understanding by design. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
39.
ZummoL.GargroetziE.GarciaA. (2020). Youth voice on climate change: Using factor analysis to understand the intersection of science, politics, and emotion. Environmental Education Research, 26(8), 1207–1226.
40.
ZummoL.GargroetziE.GarciaA. (2021). How youth use scientific argumentation in civic participation on climate change: Polar bears, the Great Barrier Reef, and “your job as president.”International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 11(4), 362–377.
