"Civic" Engagement
I'm writing this at the just-concluded Wingspread Conference on "Civic Engagement in Graduate Education", sponsored by The Upper Midwest Campus Compact Consortium and The Johnson Foundation. I'll be blogging more about this stimulating and important conference in the next couple of days.
In the wrap-up session, however, something surprising happened. Several people said that they felt "civic engagement" was not a term that would play well on their campuses. "Public engagement" or "community engagement" seemed more acceptable.
By coincidence, Peter Levine in his blog today asks "why there is no 'civics' discipline, and why that matters". He concludes his essay as follows:
It is intriguing to imagine a formal academic discipline of "civics." It might combine philosophical investigations of citizens' role in communities, historical research into changing forms of civic participation, empirical studies of political behavior and political development, formal study of rhetoric, and analysis of the frequent challenges that confront active citizens, such as free-rider problems in voluntary associations. However, it seems unlikely that such a discipline will develop in the near future. The alternative is to try to infuse many (or all) existing academic disciplines with civic themes and to organize educational institutions so that they draw their members' attention to the study and practice of citizenship. But that, too, is a tall order. There is a risk that civics, if diffused across the curriculum and research programs of a school or university, will never amount to much.
Given this uncertainty in the meaning of "civic", and its academic status, perhaps it is no wonder that people have doubts about using the term "civic engagement". But it seems to me too bad that such an important concept has fallen under suspicion.
Comments
A few thoughts on "civic" and "civics."
Part of the baggage of the word may be its association with the "civics courses" in school. As evidence (including studies suppported by Peter Levine's CIRCLE) suggests, these have positive effects in increasing students' political knowledge, but they also tend strongly to convey a state-centered view of public life and citizenship -- how a bill becomes law, what are the three branches of government -- in which there is not a robust role for students' (or other citizens) as co-creative agents of a democratic society.
I believe, however, that "civic" may emerge as a powerful and resonant term in the Minnesota Works Together initiative that the Center for Democracy and Citizenship is organizing, in partnership with a number of groups in the state. As we have held forums and done many prelimenary interviews, especially the concept and phrase "civic life" seems appealing. As one young adult put it, expressing widespread views, "civic life suggests the idea of revived community, but also with a more public face." Civic life seems to also suggest to people some of the ingredients of public communities -- small businesses with local identities and roots, beautiful, sociable and diverse public spaces, quality schools, and cultural amenities.
Posted by: Harry Boyte | March 4, 2006 05:39 AM