“Pushing the Envelope on Youth Civic Engagement: A Developmental and Liberation Psychology Perspective”

Watts, R. J., & Flanagan, C. (2007, June 29). Pushing the envelope on youth civic engagement: A developmental and liberation psychology perspective. Journal of Community Psychology, 35(6), 779-792. Retrieved from EBSCO database. doi:10.1002/jcop.20178

Watts and Flanagan use liberation and developmental psychological theory to critique current literature and organizational models for solely promoting individual outcomes, and maintaining the status quo when it comes to engaging youth in civic participation. They are particularly critical of this form of youth civic engagement in relation to youth of color and marginalized youth.

Liberation and developmental psychological theory poses the idea of youth action and civic engagement on behalf of human rights and social justice as a model for engaging youth civically and building individual identity. They note that liberation psychology is a growing part of the psychological field, and has made its greatest strides in Latin America.

They state that there is an increasing body of empirical data that shows that the untapped resource of youth engagement in advancing social and political values. They also argue that by focusing less on individual youth development and more on collective issues and social justice, youth will advance on an individual basis in forming identity and a sense of well being and belonging.

They offer “a framework for empirical research on youth activism that emphasizes liberation.... There are four components: (1) World view and social analysis, of which critical consciousness is a central part, (2) Sense of Agency, which is empowerment and efficacy (self, collective, political), (3) Opportunity Structure, which takes into account the resources available to shape and permit action based on one’s analysis, and (4) Societal Involvement Behavior (SIB)” (Watts, 2007, pgs.784-785).

SIB is where the idea of service comes into play. This article promotes sociopolitical activism, but acknowledges community service and civic engagement as other options. They reference the idea of “adultism” a few times in the article, noting there is a lack of shared respect and power among adults and youth that would need to shift in order for these ideas to take root.

The statement, “A thoughtful interrogation of authority is essential to good citizenship,” summarizes this article (Watts, 2007, p.782).

The authors/researchers are posing extremely interesting questions of youth involvement and participation, as well as youth organizing, activism, and impacting real social change. They do a good job at introducing liberation psychology as a framework to “push the envelope” as their title alludes. The empirical data is lacking; however, I am intrigued by their framework and how it could contribute to our framework of youth service in terms of engaging youth as citizens.