“Civic engagement means working to make a difference in the civic life of our communities and developing the combination of knowledge, skills, values and motivation to make that difference.”
-Thomas Ehrlich, Civic Responsibility and Higher Education
Quoted in The New York Times,
Thomas Ehrlich defines “civic engagement” as the desire to help one’s community so that it not only benefits the surrounding population, but also benefits oneself in return through the development and practice of skills necessary to grow toward productive adulthood. While civic engagement ideally focuses on the selfless improvement of others’ quality of living, instilling this admirable devotion to servitude by bribing young adults with awards and recognition implicitly plays on one’s own advancement while unknowingly assisting others in the process. Betty Franklin insists that inspiring civic engagement in this way reduces its nobility to “the organized shadow of political disregard for the poor or other targeted groups and of unregulated profit seeking.” Franklin implies that without these rewards or recognition civic engagement would cease to exist, and Americans would return to their self-centered lives without concern for the well-being of our communities. However, Quinn suggests the youth of our nation are not solely driven by tangible prizes and gratitude. “[Kids] want to learn and practice new skills… They want to contribute to the work of the larger society” (Quinn 97). Quinn makes a bold statement that children may actually want to be civically involved- an idea previously viewed as absurd. However, citizens are recognizing the craving for “constructive activities to engage [childrens’] bodies, hearts, and minds during the time they are not in school” (Quinn 97). Therefore, perhaps the definition of civic engagement as involvement for one’s own personal gain while unconsciously helping others is not as accurate as Franklin implied.
While Betty Franklin writes “civic engagement… implies a faith that the functioning of society depends on citizens’ good will participation in the enterprises that make society work,” I find it difficult to imagine that the self-centered American society is willing to freely offer valuable time for the betterment of others (Franklin 25). As a means to instill this yearning to improve one’s community at a young age, Franklin describes the actions of elementary schools, one of which is granting the Good Citizen award that “has been attached to cleanliness, politeness and compliance with authority” (Franklin 25). However, I agree with Franklin that this rewards “compliance with authority rather than with other expressions of concern for the well-being of the class.” Although I am not a history expert, I refuse to believe that the countless strides of improvement in American society were achieved through “compliance with authority.” I believe the purpose of civic engagement is to challenge the public’s “accepted” views and beliefs of our society, distinguish how these views and beliefs are correct or incorrect, and devise remedies for these false assumptions in order to benefit those in need not for personal gain, but for the community’s advancement.
Another way of describing this concept is the sense of personal responsibility individuals should feel to uphold their obligations as part of any community. However, neither views of civic engagement address the motivation behind these seemingly philanthropic actions. Although civic engagement promotes the selfless devotion to improving one’s community at the expense of one’s personal commitments and obligations, the recurrent theme is that it ultimately benefits oneself, whether through the development of professional skills, establishment of business relations, or merely sprucing up one’s resume, which implies that the idea of civic engagement may not be as noble as previously assumed.
While Ehrlich defines civic engagement as “working to make a difference in the civic life of our communities and developing the combination of knowledge, skills, values and motivation to make that difference,” I believe he merely focuses on the profit seeking outcome of its behavior, such as personal and societal advancements, rather than focusing on the active working process to obtain such strides. I believe civic engagement is not merely an end-point, the desire to “do good” to receive a Good Citizenship award or to submit an impressive resume, but reflects our society’s ongoing, caring and outreaching nature. To spend time observing the practices and thoughts we view as “norms,” and encompassing the bravery necessary to challenge these standards as insufficient and outdated are processes through which these benefits are obtained. In order to advance our communities, we must actively and conscientiously be questioning how we live our lives, and what we can do to improve it for others, not ourselves. Therefore, in my opinion, I believe a more realistic and truthful definition of civic engagement should elaborate on the “working,” and focus less on the “developing a combination of knowledge, skills, values, and motivation.”
Although I absolutely agree that engaging in civic duties and advancements develops crucial knowledge, skills, and values needed for productive adulthood, I believe that this is not the intended focus of civic engagement. These personal gains are merely a byproduct of the remarkable progress made in our nation to help the homeless, mentally and physically disabled, at-risk youth, and many more. In order to make these advancements, we must provide “a substantial opportunity,” as Quinn explains, for young people in order to develop these vital skills and inspire civic engagement in America as an ongoing, active process. Therefore, I feel civic engagement is not a point reached, not merely a difference made unconsciously while focusing on personal gain, but the working, continuous, selfless process of improving others’ qualities of life without expectation of personal recognition or profit.
No comments:
Post a Comment