Advertisement

Journal of Educational Change

, 9:221 | Cite as

Balancing power in communities of practice: An examination of increasing student voice through school-based youth–adult partnerships

  • Dana L. MitraEmail author
Article

Abstract

This article examines how power imbalances influence the formation of student voice initiatives, which are defined as school-based youth–adult partnerships that consist of youth and adults contributing to decision making processes, learning from one another, and promoting change. Using the concept of community of practice as a lens, the paper examines the ways in which power influences the mutual engagement, shared repertoire, and joint enterprise of youth–adult partnerships. Specifically, the study finds that the following strategies can strengthen student voice initiatives: building meaningful roles based upon mutual responsibility and respect among all members; developing shared language and norms, and developing joint enterprises aimed at fostering voices that have previously been silenced from decision making and knowledge-building processes.

Keywords

Student voice Community of practice Youth–adult partnerships Power Educational change Civic engagement Professional learning community Knowledge generation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I wish to thank Dorie Evensen, Benjamin Kirshner, Milbrey McLaughlin, Jim Greeno, and anonymous reviewers for comments on earlier versions of this article. Support for data collection were provided by the Walter S. Johnson Foundation and Penn State University’s College of Education.

References

  1. Barab, S. A., & Duffy, T. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. In D. Jonnassan & S. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 25–55). Mahwah: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  2. Binder, A. (2002). Contentious curricula: Afrocentrism and creationism in American public schools. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (2000). Social life of information. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  4. Camino, L. (2005). Pitfalls and promising practices of youth–adult partnerships: An evaluator’s reflections. Journal of Community Psychology, 33(1), 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Camino, L. A. (2000). Youth–adult partnerships: Entering new territory in community work and research. Applied Developmental Science, 4(Supplement Issue), 213–220.Google Scholar
  6. Cervone, B. (2002). Taking democracy in hand: Youth action for educational change in the San Francisco Bay Area. Providence, RI: What Kids Can Do, with The Forum for Youth Investment.Google Scholar
  7. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249–305.Google Scholar
  8. Cook-Sather, A. (2001). Between student and teacher: Learning to teach as translation. Teaching Education, 12(2), 177–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Davydov, V. V. (1999). The content and unsolved problems of activity theory. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Della Porta, D., & Diani, M. (1999). Social movements: An introduction. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  11. Denner, J., Meyer, B., & Bean, S. (2005). Young women’s leadership alliance: Youth–adult partnerships in an all-female after-school program. Journal of Community Psychology, 33(1), 87–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Drever, E., & Cope, P. (1999). Students’ use of theory in an initial teacher education programme. Journal of Education for Teaching, 25(2), 97–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eccles, J., & Gootman, J. A. (2002). Community programs to promote youth development. Committee on Community-Level Programs for Youth. Washington: Board on Children, Youth, and Families, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences Education, National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. National Academies of Science.Google Scholar
  14. Engeström, Y., & Miettinen, R. (1999). Introduction. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 1–18). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Eraut, M. (2002, April 1–5). Conceptual analysis and research questions: Do the concepts of “learning community” and “community of practice” provide added value? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  16. Fielding, M. (2001). Students as radical agents of change. Journal of Educational Change, 2(2), 123–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fielding, M. (2004). Transformative approaches to student voice: Theoretical underpinnings, recalcitrant realities. British Educational Research Journal, 30(2), 295–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fine, M. (1991). Framing dropouts: Notes on the politics of an urban high school. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  19. Flanagan, C., & Faison, N. (2001). Youth civic development: Implications of research for social policy and programs. Ann Arbor: Society for Research in Child Development.Google Scholar
  20. Fox, S. (2000). Communities of practice, Foucault, and actor-network theory. Journal of Management Studies, 37(6), 853–867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Freeman, D. (1999, July). Towards a descriptive theory of teacher learning and change. Paper presented at the International Study Association on Teachers and Teaching (ISATT) Conference, Dublin, Ireland.Google Scholar
  22. Gallucci, C. (2003). Communities of practice and the mediation of teachers’ responses to standards-based reform. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(35). Retrieved September 6, 2007 from http://olam.ed.asu.edu/epaa
  23. Gamson, W. (1992). The social psychology of collective action. In A. Morris & C. Mueller (Eds.), Frontiers in social movement theory (pp. 53–76). New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Goodwillie S. (Ed.). (1993). Voices from the future: Our children tell us but violence in America. New York: Crown Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  25. Greeno, J. G., McDermott, R., Cole, K., Engle, R. A., Goldman, S., & Knudsen, J., et al. (1999). Research, reform, and aims in education: Models of action in search of each other. In E. C. Lagemann & L. Shulman (Eds.), Issues in education research: Problems and possibilities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  26. Greeno, J. G., & Middle School Mathematics through Applications Project Group (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53(1), 5–26.Google Scholar
  27. Holdsworth, R., & Thomson, P. (2002). Options within the regulation and containment of student voice and/or Students researching and acting for change: Australian experiences. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.Google Scholar
  28. Holmes, J., & Meyerhoff, M. (1999). The community of practice: Theories and methodologies in language and gender research. Language in Society, 28, 173–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Honig, M., Kahne, J., & McLaughlin, M. W. (2001). School-community connections: Strengthening opportunity to learn and opportunity to teach. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 998–1028). Washington: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  30. Jones, K., & Perkins, D. (2004). Youth–adult partnerships. In C. B. Fisher & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Applied developmental science: An encyclopedia of research, policies, and programs. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Kirshner B., O’Donoghue J. L., & McLaughlin, M. W. (Eds.). (2003). New directions for youth development: Youth participation improving institutions and communities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  32. Kirshner, B. (2003). The social formation of youth voice. Paper presented at the International Conference on Civic Education, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  33. Kushman, J. W. (Ed.). (1997). Look who’s talking now: Student views of learning in restructuring schools (Vol. ED 028257). Washington: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.Google Scholar
  34. Larson, R., Walker, K., & Pearce, N. (2005). A comparison of youth-driven and adult-driven youth programs: Balancing inputs from youth and adults. Journal of Community Psychology, 33(1), 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Levin, B. (2000). Putting students at the centre in education reform. International Journal of Educational Change, 1(2), 155–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Maynard, T. (2001). The student teacher and the school community of practice: A consideration of ‘learning as participation. Cambridge Journal of Education, 31(1), 39–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  40. Milofsky, C. (1988). Structure and process in community self-help organization. In C. Milofsky (Ed.), Community organizations: Studies in resource mobilization and exchange (pp. 183–216). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Mitra, D. (2002). Making reform real: Involving youth in school reform. Unpublished Dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
  42. Mitra, D. L. (2003). Student voice in school reform: Reframing student–teacher relationships. McGill Journal of Education, 38(2), 289–304.Google Scholar
  43. Mitra, D. L. (2004). The significance of students: Can increasing “student voice” in schools lead to gains in youth development. Teachers College Record, 106(4), 651–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mitra, D. L. (2005a). Increasing student voice and moving toward youth leadership. The Prevention Researcher, 13(1), 7–10.Google Scholar
  45. Mitra, D. L. (2005b). Adults advising youth: Leading while getting out of the way. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(3), 520–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mitra, D. L. (2006a). Youth as a bridge between home and school: Comparing student voice and parent involvements as strategies for change. Education and Urban Society, 38(4), 455–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mitra, D. L. (2006b). Educational change on the inside and outside: The positioning of challengers. International Journal of Leadership Education, 9(4), 315–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mitra, D. L. (2007). Student voice in school reform: From listening to leadership. In D. Thiessen & A. Cook-Sather (Eds.), International handbook of student experience in elementary and secondary school (pp. 727–744). Dordrecht, Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Mitra, D. L. (in press). Student voice in school reform: Building youth–adult partnerships that strengthen schools and empower youth. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  50. Muncey, D., & McQuillan, P. (1991). Empowering nonentities: Students in educational reform. Working paper #5. Providence: School Ethnography Project, Coalition of Essential Schools, Brown University.Google Scholar
  51. Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge. Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Oakes, J., & Lipton, M. (2002). Struggling for educational equity in diverse communities: School reform as a social movement. Journal of Educational Change, 3(3–4), 383–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Oldfather, P. (1995). Songs “come back most to them”: Students’ experiences as researchers. Theory into Practice, 34(2), 131–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Palinscar, A. S., Magnusson, S. J., Maranao, N., Ford. D., & Brown, N. (1998). Designing a community of practice: Principles and practices of the GiSML community. Teaching and teacher education, 14(1), 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Panitz, T. (1996). A definition of collaborative vs. cooperative learning. Retrieved October 15, 2007 from: http://www.lgu.ac.uk/deliberations/collab.learning/panitz2.html
  56. Perkins, D., & Borden, L. (2003). Positive behaviors, problem behaviors, and resiliency in adolescence. In R. M. Lerner, M. A. Easterbroks, & J. Mistry (Eds.), Handbook of psychology (Vol. 6, Developmental psychology). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  57. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Rudduck, J., Day, J., & Wallace, G. (1997). Students’ perspectives on school improvement. In A. Hargreaves (Ed.), Rethinking educational change with heart and mind (The 1997 ASCD year book). Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  59. Rudduck, J., & Flutter, J. (2000). Pupil participation and perspective: ‘Carving a new order of experience’. Cambridge Journal of Education, 30(1), 75–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Schwartz, D. L. (1999). The productive agency that drives collaborative learning. In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 197–241). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science/Pergamon.Google Scholar
  61. Silva, E. (2003). Struggling for inclusion: A case study of students as reform partners. In B. Rubin & E. Silva (Eds.), Critical voices in school reform: Students living through change (pp. 11–30). London: Routledge Farmer.Google Scholar
  62. Snow, D., & Benford, R. (1992). Master frames and cycles of protest. In A. Morris & C. McClurg Mueller (Eds.), Frontiers in social movement theory (pp. 133–155). New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  64. Thorkildsen, T. A. (1994). Toward a fair community of scholars: Moral education as the negotiation of classroom practices. Journal of Moral Education, 23(4), 371–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society (trans: Cole, M.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Wasley, P., Hampel, R. L., & Clark, R. W. (1997). Kids and school reform. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.Google Scholar
  67. Wehlage, G. G., Rutter, R. A., Smith, G. A., Lesko, N., & Fernandez, R. R. (1989). Reducing the risk: Schools as communities of support. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  68. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard University Business School Press.Google Scholar
  70. Wenger, E. C., & Snyder, W. M. (2000). Communities of practice: The organizational frontie. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 139–145.Google Scholar
  71. Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2001, Nov). Community of practice: What is it, and how can we use this metaphor for teacher professional development? Paper presented at the Annual proceedings of selected research and development [and] practice papers presented at the national convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
  72. Yohalem, N. (2003). Adults who make a difference: Identifying the skills & characteristics of successful youth workers. In F. A. Villarruel, D. F. Perkins, L. M. Borden & J. G. Keith (Eds.), Community youth development: Programs, policies, and practices (pp. 358–372). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  73. Zeldin, S. (2000). Integrating research and practice to understand and strengthen communities for adolescent development: An introduction to the special issue and current issues. Applied Developmental Science, 4(Suppl. 1), 2–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Zeldin, S. (2004). Youth as agents of adult and community development: Mapping the processes and outcomes of youth engaged in organizational governance. Applied Developmental Science, 8(2), 75–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zeldin, S., Camino, L., Calvert, M., & Ivey, D. (2002). Youth–adult partnerships and positive youth development: Some lessons learned from research and practice in Wisconsin. Madison: University of Wisconsin-Extension.Google Scholar
  76. Zeldin, S., Camino, L., & Mook, C. (2005). The adoption of innovation in youth organizations: Creating the conditions for youth–adult partnerships. Journal of Community Psychology, 33(1), 121–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Education Policy StudiesPenn State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations