www.sosyalbilgiler.org Journal of Social Studies Education Research Sosyal Bilgiler Eğitimi Araştırmaları Dergisi 2016: 7(2), 1-29 © 2016 Journal of Social Studies Education Research, ISSN: 1309-9108 Using Digital Participatory Research to Foster Glocal Competence: Constructing Multimedia Projects as a Form of Global and Civic Citizenship Sarah A. Mathews1 Abstract Digital Participatory Research (DPR) combines grass-roots participatory research and photojournalism, asks students to investigate assets and issues within their community, and facilitates civic participation by using problem-posing and praxis-orientated methods. Although there is a vast amount of research documenting the impact of DPR at the local level, there is limited research about the use of this methodology to facilitate global competence. This study presents the results from a multi-case study analysis of two groups simultaneously engaging in the DPR project; one in Miami, Florida and one in Kingston, Jamaica. This research study examines whether this methodology helps contribute to glocal citizenship. In this case the term glocal citizenship mergers civic and global competence and helps students understand how local and global influences interact in their everyday lives. Westheimer and Kahne’s (2004) three kinds of citizenship and Landarf and Doscher’s (2015) three global outcomes were applied to individual interview data, observational field notes, and transcripts of digital media. This study found that students’ projects often offered solutions at the personally-responsible and participatory level. When they addressed topics that would raise awareness about systemic global issues, they did not include information that would challenge systems of power and oppression. Also, while students did not learn substantive content to promote global awareness, they did participate in global engagement opportunities and recognized aspects that they shared with their international peers. Keywords: Digital participatory research, glocal, global competency, civic competency, Introduction Rhetoric about 21st-century skills emphasizes an awareness of the diversity of human cultures, the physical and the natural world, the ability to analyze issues from multiple perspectives, the capacity to work collaboratively with others, and a sense of civic and social responsibility (AAC&U, 2007; Landorf & Doscher, 2015). These skills contribute to an individual’s global competency or “the capacity and disposition to understand and act on issues of global significance (Boix-Mansilla & Jackson, 2011, p. xiii). Twenty-first-century skills, and in particular global competency, are facilitated through global citizenship education and are 1 Assist. Prof., Florida International University, samathew@fiu.edu mailto:samathew@fiu.edu Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2016: 7(2), 1-29 supported by the knowledge, skills, and dispositions developed in social studies education. However, in the United States, current educational reform focuses on college and career readiness (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers, 2010) privileging literacy and mathematics instruction, while decreasing the importance of the social sciences and humanities. This trend is most apparent at the elementary level (Bisland, 2012; Fitchett, Heafner & Lambert, 2012, 2014) and suggests that students enter adolescence deficient in skills necessary to understand and participate in society. The U.S. is not the only country implementing reforms for 21st century economic and social progress. In 2009 the Government of Jamaica (GoJ) issued a national reform plan, Vision 2030 Jamaica, outlining a plan to bring the nation to developed country status by 2030. Among numerous reform areas, this proposal emphasizes the importance of restructuring education to develop globally competent citizens. The profile of the globally competent citizen, outlined in Vision 2030 Jamaica, included the ability to be “agile of mind, adjust to different situations,” and develop a perspective that is “tolerant of diversity” and “committed to a sustainable lifestyle” (Government of Jamaica 2012, 57). However, Mathews & Reid-Brown (2015) found that when interviewed, Jamaican teachers understood global education as a “globalized education” (i.e. education from outside of Jamaica), were not confident in their ability to create globally competent students, and felt they lacked the resources to enhance these skills. By focusing on career and college readiness, and in turn economic development, both the U.S. and Jamaican governments disregard the role schools play in preparing young people to contribute to the creation of a more just democratic society (Mira, Garcia & Morrell, 2016, p. 1). I propose that “glocal pedagogies” have the ability to help students learn about the world by examining issues that impact the local community and vice versa. Digital participatory research (DPR) is a glocal pedagogy that combines grass-roots participatory inquiry and photojournalism, asks students to investigate assets and issues within their community using their academic skills, and facilitates civic participation by using problem-posing and praxis-orientated methods (ePals & Buck Institute for Education, 2014; Photovoice.org, 2012). Although numerous studies have documented the impact of DPR on youth civic engagement at the local level, research that addresses whether this methodology can facilitate global citizenship is limited. In this article, I present data from two groups of middle school students that were simultaneously working on DPR projects, one in the United States and one in Sarah A. MATHEWS 3 Jamaica. The purpose is to examine how implementing DPR projects with middle school students in transnational settings contributes to glocal citizenship. In particular, this piece describes what DPR looks like in the classroom as well as how participants are experiencing and interpreting the process. This manuscript will also discuss the ways global citizenship remain undeveloped even after the youth participated in this project. The Conceptual Framework of Glocal Citizenship Roland Robertson (1995) first coined the term "glocal" to discuss the process of negotiating simultaneous universal and particular economic forces. However, there are a variety of social, political, and cultural issues that blur these lines as well. This negotiation of multiple areas of belonging and participation begs the question, “How do individuals successfully navigate their lives locally as they interact with the world globally?” (Sarra, 2008, p. 61). Glocality affirms the notion that to understand the local, individuals must understand the global, and vice versa. Social studies educators, and in particular global educators, address this when recognizing that, as future citizens, students are asked to participate, in a variety of different ways, within local, national, and global contexts (Banks, 2007; Brooks & Normore, 2010; Ladson-Billings, 2007). As a result, students need to develop a citizenship that merges both civic and global competence. Westheimer and Kahne’s (2004) groundbreaking study outlined three archetypes of what a “good citizen” is and does, embedded within civic education programs. Each type of citizen is based on a core assumption regarding how individuals solve problems. The first kind of citizen is the personally responsible citizen, someone who acts responsibly in her/his community, obeys laws, and volunteers in time of crisis. To solve societal problems individuals “must have a good character” and be “law-abiding citizens” (p. 240). The second kind of citizen is the participatory citizen. These are active members of the community that understand how government agencies work and know strategies for accomplishing collective tasks. The assumption behind this type of citizenry is that citizens must actively participate as leaders within established systems and community structures (p. 242). Finally, the justice-oriented citizen is aware of social movements and seeks out areas of injustice. This type of citizenry requires individuals to assess social, political and economic structures critically, use problem-solving skills to improve society, and work to change those structures that reproduce patterns of injustice (p. 240). This framework provides a series of aptitudes that can help facilitate an individual’s civic competence. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2016: 7(2), 1-29 In 2013, the U.S. National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS), issued a response to the Common Core State Standards’ marginalization of the social studies. NCSS outlined standards for College, Career, and Civic Preparedness (C3). The C3 framework utilizes an inquiry arc that calls for students to evaluate sources, conduct research, and use disciplinary skills and concepts to address real world problems (NCSS, 2013). The C3 inquiry arc provides these skills. Civic competence must also include civic efficacy or the extent to which an individual believes that one’s actions can make a difference in society (Crocetti, Jahromi, & Meeus, 2012; Westheimer & Kahne, 2006). Therefore civic education must help students build civic efficacy by helping them developing the skills necessary to participate in society. Civic competency skills - i.e. using an inquiry arc and promoting civic efficacy - can promote problem-solving skills and transform social inequities, as also encouraged by the Jamaican Ministry of Education, in Vision 2030 Jamaica (Government of Jamaica, 2012). In an increasingly interdependent and transmigratory world individuals also need to develop global competence. Landorf and Doscher (2015) suggest that every global education program attempts to foster three global learning outcomes. The first outcome, global awareness, requires an understanding of the interconnectedness of global systems, trends and issues. Global perspective refers to the ability to analyze local, national, and global issues from multiple viewpoints. Finally, global engagement addresses an individuals’ willingness to take part in problem-solving at the local, national, and global level (Mathews & Landorf, 2015). Once again global competence requires knowledge, skills, and a disposition towards action. In fact, as Harshman (2013) reminds us, critical global competence is also directly aligned with the inquiry arc found at the core of the C3 framework. Digital Participatory Research as a Glocal Pedagogy Digital Participatory Research (DPR) as used in this study, is based on the goals that emerge from the literature on Community-Based Research (CBR) (see Hacker, 2013) and Youth Participatory Action Research (YPAR) (see Mirra, Garcia, & Morrell, 2016). Each field promotes research that emerges from the everyday experiences of those most directly impacted by policy decisions. Research conducted in this vein differs from positivistic research in five major ways. First, instead of a lone researcher, research is conducted as a collective. Second, the researchers are “insiders” in a given situation. Third, the inquiry is critical in nature, examining historical and contemporary loci of power. Four, participants are asked to consider issues from multiple lenses. Sarah A. MATHEWS 5 Finally, knowledge is seen as active, not passive (Cammarota & Fine, 2008). CBR and YPAR methodologies challenge assumptions about who is permitted to create knowledge in society, who is allowed to translate or transfer knowledge in our society, and whose voices possess legitimacy in society. For YPAR this means that research must be conducted with students, not on or for them (Mirra, Garcia, & Morrell, 2016, chapter 1, section 2, para 9). DPR seeks to examine what happens when we use “participatory” forms of research with visual and digital methods of inquiry (Gubrium & Harper, 2013). Digital and photo methodologies are consistent with transformative and participatory research and have been used to raise awareness of instances of injustice around the world (PhotoVoice 2011; Wang, Morrel-Samuels, Hutchinson, Bell & Pestronk, 2004; Wilson, Dasho, Martin, Wang & Minkler 2007). For example, Cahill, Rios- Moore, & Threatts’ (2008) used DPR strategies in the Lower Eastside of New York with a group or women, the Fed Up Honey’s, who set out the challenge the stereotypes of young urban women of color. This collective group found that the research process allowed them to “reverse the gaze” of traditional research methods while examining the contradictory and political notions of citizenship (pp. 91-92). In “The See it Our Way Photovoice Project” supported through PhotoVoice.org, (2012), youth from Albania, Armenia, Lebanon, Romania, and Pakistan used photographs to document the impact of human trafficking in their communities. Scholars have used digital images and media with participants to tell stories, elicit stories, and critique stories (Ewald, 2001; Schensul & Dalglish, 2015; Wang & Burris, 1994). Essentially, DPR is based on the drive to “get cameras into the hands of youth,” as one method to motivate and facilitate youth civic participation (Ewald, 2001; Luttrell & Chalfen, 2010). Digital images and methodologies have also been used to facilitate global competence. For example, after analyzing global images students have been shown to develop a deeper understanding of global diversity (Lintner, 2005) and diminish stereotypes of the ‘Other’ (Scott, 1999). Photography can also be used to solicit an individual’s subjective perceptions of their experiences and interpretation. For example, Spindler and Spindler (1993) incorporated photography into their consciousness-raising tool cultural therapy. In cultural therapy, participants are asked a series of questions while viewing photographs or documentary images. The goal is to help individuals reflect on the taken-for-granted assumptions they bring with them into the “viewing” experience and interrogate these as potential biases to knowledge acquisition. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2016: 7(2), 1-29 This review of research documents how DPR has been used to help youth and young adults analyze local issues, critique power-relations within societal systems and institutions, and participate in developing solutions for change at the local level. Photo-methodologies have been shown to serve as also effective tools to develop global competence, forcing individuals to examine their own cultural assumptions. However, there is limited research on how DPR can foster civic and global competence simultaneously. Can this methodology facilitate that adage: “Think globally, act locally”? Methodology Although there is a wealth of research on the impact of DPR on students’ awareness of local issues, there is limited research on how DPR methods can be used to facilitate both civic and global competence concurrently. This qualitative research study reports the results of a multi-case study (Stake, 2006) of two groups of young adults simultaneously engaging in DPR projects; one group in the United States and one group in Jamaica. The goal was to determine if, after surveying their community, youth can identify a problem or issue that can be documented and addressed through DPR. Throughout the project, the youth groups were connected with their peers overseas to facilitate intercultural collaboration and help students better reflect on the participatory research process. The research questions guiding this project include: 1. How are youth identifying and documenting issues in their local community? 2. How were youth demonstrating their civic competency through their DPR projects? 3. How were youth demonstrating their global competency through their DPR projects? Using the multi-case study approach, I was able to identify general themes that emerged from the data as well as the particularities within specific cases (Stake, 2006). Context and Participation The first DPR project took place in Florida at Augusta F. Savage Middle School (AFS) (all names are pseudonyms) in Miami, Florida. The project lasted over a three month period and was incorporated into a research-intensive elective as part of the Cambridge program. Since the program uses a cohort model, and since the students’ social studies teacher also taught their Cambridge elective, lessons often overlapped with the students' social studies period and coursework. Along with six pre-service social studies teachers, I served as a participant-researcher Sarah A. MATHEWS 7 by helping to facilitate the project during various stages of the project. Eleven sixth grade students in this cohort agreed to participate in the study (8 females; 3 males). The second DPR project took place at Louise B. Coverly High School (LBC) in Kingston, Jamaica. The project took place over a ten-day period during the same semester. Again, as a participant-researcher, I conducted this project along with one pre-service social studies teacher, while in Kingston. Seventeen, eighth-grade students (9 females; 2 males) were selected by their social studies teacher to participate. The DPR workshop took place after school or during the students’ elective period. Each sample was purposive and convenient. I collected data from those students who were engaged in the DPR project, who gave assent, and who submitted parental consent (Fraenkel, Wallen, & Hyun, 2014). Data Collection and Analysis Keeping with the tenets of DPR, the observations and written documentations of participants’ field work, as well as the final multimedia project, serve as the primary data source in this study. The students’ research findings help capture each group’s emic, or insider, knowledge or experience (Stake, 2006). I conducted one hour-long, semi-structured individual interview with a sample of each group of students: twelve LBC students and five AFS students (See Appendix A for attached Interview Questions). These interviews were designed to probe for additional information and explanation of the research process. I also included my observation field notes that I captured while working on these projects, as well as while watching the final DPR products. Throughout the process the students in Jamaica communicated electronically with the students in Florida, sharing their experience engaging in the DPR process. I included these exchanges as data. All interviews and digital data were translated verbatim. To analyze the data, I first engaged in a critical analysis of discourse (Gee, 2004) while looking for common and uncommon emerging themes using inductive coding procedures (Patton, 2002). These themes were then compared to Westheimer and Kahne’s (2004) three types of civic engagement and the Landorf and Doscher's (2015) three global learning competencies. Throughout my analysis, I needed to remain aware of my positionality. I am a white, female, middle-class professor, and I have spent the majority of my life living in the Mid-Western and South-Eastern portions of the United States. I have only lived and worked in the area surrounding AFS, a cosmopolitan yet primarily Latino community in South Florida, for five years. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2016: 7(2), 1-29 I have also been working with teachers in Jamaica over the same five-year period. My university offers a master's degree program in Kingston, and I serve as an instructor, traveling to Jamaica for four weekends in a row during the semesters I am slated to teach. I have also complete two, 14- day research trips to this nation. However, I acknowledge that I have still had limited exposure to Jamaica's educational, political, and cultural climates. I was also new to each school placement, i.e. I started working with both schools during the DPR process. Therefore, it was very important to utilize a variety of triangulation methods to balance my etic, or outsider perspective, with those participating in each case (Stake, 2006). The multiple forms of data, e.g. my observations versus individual interviews, were used to form a consensus around the analysis. I employed member checks, verifying my interpretation with those offered by the student participants, their teachers, and the pre-service teachers that worked on the DPR project. Finally, the DPR methodology privileges the voices of those that are most active in the research. Therefore I have infused quotes throughout this report to present as much of this research using the student-researchers' own voices. Findings Lessons from Augusta F. Savage Middle School (AFS) AFS is located in the metropolitan and cosmopolitan city of Miami, FL. Approximately ninety-seven percent of the student population at this school identifies as Hispanic.1 Two percent identify as white, and one percent identify as Asian. Twenty-two percent of the students are classified as English Language Learners (ELL) and 18% under the category Students with Disabilities (SWD). The school is required to provide additional educational support and services to these groups of students. Eighty-seven percent of AFS students qualify for a Free and Reduced lunch as a result of their parents’ or guardians’ socio-economic status. While these statistics reflect the demographics of the surrounding community, the students in this study participate in the School District’s Cambridge Magnet School program. The Cambridge program is internationally recognized, implemented around the world, and adheres to a rigorous academic curriculum. The district’s website describes the Cambridge program as one that prepares “students to distinguish themselves in further academic study” (University of Cambridge & Miami-Dade County Schools, n.d.). The school’s website indicates that students in this program complete a multitude of assignments that infuse Advanced Academics, Technology, Global Education, and Arts & Culture. Students must apply for this program and must have a Sarah A. MATHEWS 9 strong record in core subjects, maintain regular attendance, and be recommended by previous teachers to be accepted. I gained access to this cohort through one of teachers in the Cambridge program, Mr. B. I originally approached Mr. B in December 2015 to serve as an adjunct instructor in the Secondary Social Studies Education program I oversee at the university where I work. We were reviewing the activities that our university pre-service teachers completed in the prior course, including a DPR project within the university’s community, when Mr. B suggested that DPR may work within his sixth-grade courses at AFS. The Cambridge Elective course he was teaching was designed to help students develop and utilize research skills to address real-world issues. The DPR process used with the AFS students. In February 2015, I met with Mr. B and his sixth-grade students and explained the DPR process. At this first stage, Mr. B asked the students to brainstorm a list of the issues that they believed were impacting their community, first in small groups and then as a large class. Angelica explained the process saying, Well, what we did was…we all wrote words in the beginning about the community. And then we chose some major issues. We all voted on the most major topics of all of the papers, and we put it on the board. Then we got to choose which group we wanted to be in. (individual interview 04/13/2015) After discussing and pairing down the list of issues, the class decided to investigate four issues: The Conditions of Public Park Bathrooms, Littering around the School and Community, Animal Problems, and the Lack of Security in the area. The students each chose the topic that they were most interested in researching and formed inquiry groups. Groups learned they would create a digital video about their topic that included the following information: a) a definition of the problem, b) the causes of this issue, c) the issue’s impact on the community and individual citizens, d) and possible solutions to address this issue. To start the process, students had to examine the “problem” from a variety of different perspectives or stakeholders. Students completed an activity based on a visible thinking strategy known as Circle of Viewpoints (see Figure 1) (Fine, 2014). First students filled in the chart from the perspective of a particular stakeholder. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2016: 7(2), 1-29 1. I am thinking of ___________ (the topic). From the point of view of _________________ (the point of view you’ve chosen). 2. I think … describe the topic from your viewpoint. Be an actor- take on the character of your viewpoint. Write from that perspective. 3. Write: A question I have from this viewpoint is… ask a question from this viewpoint. 4. Write: What new ideas or questions do you have about the topic that you didn’t have before? Figure 1. Circle of Viewpoints – Brainstorming strategy They then shared their reflections within their inquiry groups. This process helped group members determine which types of information they needed to gather to support their DPR project. During this session, Mr. B introduced various methods the students could use to gather data. The students periodically worked on the projects over a 10-week period. First, they developed a storyboard where they sketched out the different scenes they wanted to create in their movie (see Figure 2). Groups could fill in the boxes with text or illustrations. Introduction: Scene One Scene Two Scene Three Scene Four Conclusion: Scene Five Figure 2: Example of a Storyboard Sarah A. MATHEWS 11 Storyboarding helped students outline the types of information their group needed to research and the forms of visual artifacts they would need to collect or produce to successfully create their DPR movies. For example, some students wanted to include interviews with individuals that are impacted by the issue. Storyboarding helped them determine where the interviews may best support their presentation and influenced how they could shape interview questions to present essential questions. It also helps to help students focus on the practical aspects involved with gathering digital data (e.g. time, editing, lightening, etc.). During this stage the whole class discussed the ethical implications of engaging in digital participatory research. Mr. B. and myself gave students two consent forms: 1) a form for individuals to sign that they consent to have their image and/or voice used in a video format and 2) a form for the photographer/videography to consent to allow myself and the research team to use their images. After reviewing the forms, we discussed, as a class, why it was important to seek an individual’s (oral and written consent) before interviewing or photographing them and why we should ask for permission to reproduce images that other collect. Mr. B. carved out a serious of sessions to help students work on the research and video- production stages. For example, some sessions provided students the opportunity to use computers to gather supporting research. During other class periods, students used iPads, Smartphones and additional technologies to capture interviews, photographs, and digital or audio-recordings to incorporate into their video. Throughout these working sessions, the university pre-service teachers in the social studies program, and enrolled in Mr. B's college course, intermittently volunteered to help the AFS students, when it fit into their schedule. The university students helped the inquiry groups analyze and organize their data and edit their final projects. Once they finished, each group presented their videos to the research team. During an end- of-the-school-year presentation, school faculty and parents also had the opportunity to view student presentations. The following section gives an overview of the four projects that were created by AFS students and the process these individual groups went through to create their presentations. Park bathrooms. Five students (three females and one male) examined the conditions of the bathrooms found in two large parks in their surrounding community. To gather data, the Park Bathrooms Group (PBG) captured photographic images at the parks, distributed a survey to community members, and captured a video of the bathroom conditions. The PBG used a variety Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2016: 7(2), 1-29 of diverse technology applications, programs, and equipment to complete their projects including the WhatsApp® application, Flipagram®, Microsoft Moviemaker® and a selfie stick. They also researched historical and contemporary information about the park. For example, they discovered that one space served as a “horse racing camp for the community and local farmers starting in 1979” and that the second park hosts an annual Fair “visited by over 600,000 people annually” (PBG video). They defined the problem as, paper waste, dangerous puddles, and bugs that could carry diseases filling the bathrooms, conditions which could lead to further health- related issues. Cecelia offered the following solution to this issue, “We could clean up the bathrooms ourselves, or probably have a fund-raiser and ask people to come. If the park could hire more staff members to come in everyday, there would be less problems” (individual interview, 05/22/2015). The littering situation. The Littering Group (LG) also had five group members (three females and two males). The Littering Group was inspired to examine the causes and impacts of littering due to a lot of broken bottles and cans found on their schools’ tennis courts. Most of this trash was left over from community members who used the facilities after school hours. Marta was inspired to join this group for personal reasons. She said, I came to this country when I was eight. So most of my life I lived in a Central American country, where there is a lot of trash and littering, and that affects all of us. Where my mom used to work, it smelled really bad because of littering. So then I thought, “Hey, I can fix this problem here now so it doesn’t get bigger.” After defining littering as any “trash such as paper, cans, and bottles that are left lying on the environment that are not supposed to be there,” the group focused on the “money spent to clean up littering” and possible health risks posed as the issues’ major impact (LG video). The LG conducted research on the historical impact of littering, interviewed students and teachers in the school, and created a collage made of recyclable materials (see Image 1). Sarah A. MATHEWS 13 Image 1: Collage of recyclable items They posed the following solutions: Tie bundles before placing them in the trash can, be a role model for younger children by properly getting rid of waste, and carrying a litter-bag in the car (see Image 2). Image 2: Example of a litterbag The students in this video also Microsoft PowerPoint ® and Moviemaker® to create this video. Animal problems. The Animal Problems Group (APG) originally chose to focus on how to address pet owners that did not clean up after their pet’s waste but then realized there were additional issues in the community that impact pets. For example, Maria Jose explained, Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2016: 7(2), 1-29 There are sometimes like loose animals, stray dogs. Like the animals are everywhere. Off W [Street] there is a cat like dead on the floor. It’s like, flat on the ground; you see like all of the organs and stuff. (individual interview, 05/22/2015) This group of five students (three females and two males) decided to expand the scope of the project to include stray animals. The APG discovered that “27,000 stray animals are brought into animal shelters and more than 20,000 animals are euthanized each year” in their county. They also found that stray animals can transmit diseases such as “rabies or Leukemia” (APG video). This group created a movie filled with a collage of images and suggested that the community “put up signs telling owners to clean up after their dog” or “report strays so they can get returned to their owners” as examples of possible solutions. Community security. The Community Security Group (CSG) was made up of four students (two female and two male students). The CSG was inspired to research this issue after learning from the media that a young girls’ body was found burned, behind a dumpster in a local shopping center (observation notes, 02/12/2015). This group gathered historical research on the law-enforcement agencies in the area, located crime statistics, and captured videos of the areas they felt were unsafe. Angelica explained, There are areas that when you go through those areas, there is hardly any security at all. So I thought it was an issue that we could solve or at least tell somebody about. That we could at least show that this is something that we really care about in our community, the security. (individual interview, 05/22/2016) The CSG group constructed their project as a news report, with a news desk and “on location reporters”. They incorporated video clips from news outlets reporting on the young girl’s death. The group suggested adding more security cameras and better lighting, and increasing the police that patrol the areas (CSG video). Lessons from Louise B. Coverly High School (LBC) LBC is a non-traditional high school, serving grades 7-11, and located in Kingston, Jamaica. Non-traditional high schools, as opposed to traditional and church-run schools, were established in the 1970’s and are fully-funded by the Government of Jamaica. Unlike the private and church-run schools, non-traditional schools serve a disproportionate amount of poor students (Evans, 2001). When the current principal, Mrs. D., arrived at the school in 2004, “the school was in trouble. The students were struggling academically, and rival gangs were threatening the local Sarah A. MATHEWS 15 community. I came in to try to clean the place up” (Miss D., individual interview, 03/08/2015). Although Miss D. managed to bridge groups in the community and secure a safe place for students to learn, the school’s test scores remained low. In April 2015, I traveled to Kingston, Jamaica along with Miss C., a pre-service, secondary social studies education teacher. During this visit we conducted a 10-day DPR workshop with one cohort of eighth-grade students. Miss C., born to Haitian parents, is one of the first generation of her family born in the U.S. and attending an American university. She had also conducted a similar DPR project in rural Haiti the summer before our research in Jamaica, and we spent some time merging our curricular ideas before traveling abroad. Once arriving in Jamaica, Miss C. and I worked with the social studies department to select a group of students willing to participate in the workshop. Twenty-five students originally showed up to our first after school session to participate. Eleven students completed the entire workshop, and 10 students participated in individual interviews. Unlike their AFS counterparts, this group of students represents a typical cohort of students at this particular site. The only difference is that the LBC students that participated in this study were willing and able to stay after school to engage in the DPR process. The DPR process used with the LBC students. During our first meeting, Miss C. modeled the same procedures with the LBC students that Mr. B. utilized with the AFS students. First, individual students brainstormed a list of the issues that they believed were impacting their community and then shared these in small groups. Then the small groups reported the main themes to the larger group. After the small groups had reported their ideas, we discovered there were 18 topics of interest (see Image 3). Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2016: 7(2), 1-29 Image 3: Brainstorming ideas for DPR projects in Jamaica As a larger group, we worked to decrease the list and came to a consensus around three groups: Abuses (physical, sexual and mental abuse), Road Conditions, and Violence. Over the course of the next eight days, we meet with the students during their elective period or after school for at least two hours each session. We devoted each workshop session to help students use a different strategy. For example, on the second after school, workshop session the students each chose the topic that they were most interested in researching and formed inquiry groups. Each student in the group answered the following questions: What do I think is the problem? What additional information do I need in order to address this issue? Where can I go to find out additional information? When I hear multiple stories how do I determine what is right? We used a Think-Pair-Share strategy where students first reflected on the questions and wrote an individual responses (Think), then shared their responses with their small inquiry groups (Pair), and each group reported out the information that they discussed. Then students created a word web to communicate their initial ideas about the causes, impact, and solutions for each issue (see Image 4). Sarah A. MATHEWS 17 Image 4: Concept map from the Violence group On day three each student located an article or online source of data about their issue and completed a graphic organizer that guided them through analyzing this information. This graphic organizer is an activity based on two other visible thinking strategy: “What Makes you Say That?” (see Figure 3) and “I Used to Think, But Now I Think…” (see Figure 4) (Fine, 2014). What’s Happening? What do I see/ know that makes me say that? Based on what’s happening and the evidence you found, what do you think the author is trying to say? Figure 3: What Makes you Say That? Graphic Organizer Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2016: 7(2), 1-29 I use to think… Now I think… What new evidence did you learn from reading? Explain why it did or did not persuade you to change your mind. Figure 4: I Used to Think, But Now I Think…Graphic Organizer On additional sessions, students searched for images and statistical data. During two sessions students filmed various aspects of the video. Prior to filming, the LBC students received the same consent forms as we held a similar discussion about ethics in DPR. On the ninth day, each group met with Miss C. or myself as we demonstrated Microsoft Moviemaker ®. We had half a day to help them to create and edit their movies. Therefore we demonstrated the technology to the groups of students while they told us how to edit the film. This included editing out mistakes, embedding music into the video, transitioning between scenes, and adding text. Those who were not working with us on the editing portion were allowed to practicing creating and editing their own short films on our laptops or iPads. Had we had time, and in future DPR research projects, I would ensure that there were at least 1 training session to demonstrate the technology and at least one session to let groups edit their own projects. At the conclusion of our 10th course session, the students presented their videos to their peers and faculty in the school. During the LBC workshop, we faced a variety of additional logistical issues that we did not face at AFS. The community surrounding the school served as an inspiration and a barrier to the project. For example, at one point during our original discussion one young man told us he no longer wanted to participate because, “if his community found out that he was talking about these issues he may face retaliation” (observation notes, 03/08/2015). Mrs. D. also advised us not send the iPads we provided home with the children, “since we would never see them again.” We were, however, able to travel, in small research teams, to areas outside of the school, to capture video images and conduct interviews with local community members. Finally, internet access was Sarah A. MATHEWS 19 inconsistent throughout our entire workshop. In fact, we were disconnected on two occasions while trying to communicate via Skype® to the students at AFS. These issues raise awareness to the practical and ethical implications of engaging in DPR in different locations, particularly when researchers are outsiders, as well as highlighted the discrepancy between these schools regarding access to resources. Road conditions. There were three female members in the Road Conditions (RC) group. These students chose to examine the poor road conditions throughout Jamaica. Maranda explained why she felt this issue was important saying, “the fact that it hurts people when their loved ones die or their animals. It’s also a constant reminder from the government that they promise to fix the roads but every time they promise there’s always an incident” (individual interview, 03/10/2015). They indicated that the terrible conditions of the roads were caused by “crashes, poor infrastructure, and lack of money and resources” and that the impact included “accidents that result in injuries and even death for people and animals” (RC Word Web Assignment). After researching the issue, the students found that improper drainage created most of the potholes and that over three hundred people died as a result of road fatalities in the previous year (RC video). This group did not believe the Jamaican government would solve this issue soon, and instead urged the members of the community to take action. They suggested that people could sell items or hold a marathon to raise funds to repair the roads in their own communities. Faith even suggested, “I was thinking that we could use this [video] and like publish it. We [her emphasis] could put it in the newspaper on like Sunday and then the next day on the television” (individual interview, 03/10/2015). The RC group video-taped themselves talking next to potholes outside of their school’s campus and juxtaposed this with images and statistics of dangerous road conditions throughout the country. This group also wrote a song to bring awareness to the issue, which they incorporated as background music for their video. Violence group. The Violence Group included three female and two male students. The students in this group determined that gang issues and misunderstandings often instigate violence, and the impact is that violence is a “cycle that puts everyone in jeopardy and makes our commitment to each other weaker” (see Image 4) (VG Word Web Assignment). For solutions, they suggested “instead of fighting we could talk it out”, “increase community awareness of meeting with the police,” and “form a group to tell others how to prevent violence.” The group organized their video as a skit to respond to an incidence that occurred at school a few weeks Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2016: 7(2), 1-29 before and performed this on the school’s football field. Marlon explained, “Sometimes violence starts when we play a football game. Then that situation continues outside of school. People join groups, and it gets bigger than it needs to be” (individual interview, 03/10/2015). The students acted out the scenario that prompted the violence but included alternative responses to each case they displayed. Abuses group. The third group of students was motivated to examine abuse after learning about a young woman's murder in the area surrounding the school. An older man had abused the girl and then shot her when discovering that she was pregnant (Jamaica Observer, 2014). Four female students joined this group and decided to examine physical, mental, and sexual abuse. In their research, the group discovered that there were over 7,000 reports of abuse in Jamaica during 2012 and 10,000 during 2013 (Jamaican Gleaner, 2013). Faith suggested that “sometimes people commit abuses because someone has done this to them first” (individual interview, 03/10/2015). The first scene in their movie took place in the abandoned lot where authorities discovered the young girl’s body. Each member of the group acted out the role of an “on location” reporter to give information about their various component of the video – i.e. causes, impact, and solutions. The Abuses group decided that they could write a “petition or hold a community meeting to raise awareness of the issue. These group also wrote and performed a song as part of their presentation. Lessons about Glocal Competency Differing Types of Citizenship and Civic Engagement In each of these projects students utilized the inquiry arc promoted by the NCSS’ (2013) C3 Framework. Students developed compelling questions, used disciplinary knowledge and skills, and evaluated sources for information. The DPR projects also served as a product for communicating ideas. For example, AFS student Maria Jose shared, “We learned how to put music into videos. We learned how to edit videos. We learned how to put in videos. We learned how to put in captions” (individual interview, 05/22/015). Carol-Ann, a student from LBC, also discussed how these types of projects provided opportunities for students to express themselves. She said, It really helped us to express ourselves. Sometimes I see things that are affecting me, and I am afraid to talk about it. Now, you helped me to learn that I can express it more and talk more and share it with other people. (individual interview, 03/10/2015) The final portion of the social studies inquiry arc is to prepare students to take informed action, and as described in the previous section, this process had various results across and within Sarah A. MATHEWS 21 each location. There were noticeable differences regarding the type of citizenship promoted within their DPR projects. Two projects from AFS, the Littering Group and the Animals Problem Group, focused on solutions that straddled the personally-responsible and participatory types of citizenship. These projects offered solutions such as “being a role model and showing others how to properly dispose of litter” and “pet owners can be responsible to clean up after their pets.” Yet these groups also suggested that members could organize activities in the larger community. For example, when asked what she could do to help her community, Cecelia offered the following reflection: There are meetings every Thursdays in my community. So if I were to help I could go there and I would say there is a problem in our [park] bathrooms or with littering. And I could send emails to the whole community. And we talked about raising money to clean our bathrooms. If people were to check their emails and then do it than we would have enough money to clean our bathrooms. In our community, we should have a store that has bags to clean up dog poop. Because last year they didn’t have that and you would see poop everywhere. But this year, there is a fine. Her explanation suggests that people should act responsibly in their own community; however, community members may also need to engage in concerted efforts to increase awareness of issues and motivate community participation. Two projects in this study, the AFS’s Park Bathrooms Group and LBC’s Road Conditions Group, offered more participatory-oriented solutions in their project. For example, The Park Bathrooms Group did suggest an awareness campaign to urge people to clean up after using the facilities. They also contacted the Parks Department to request they hire additional custodians to maintain the bathrooms throughout the day (PBG video). Jamaican road conditions would also seem to require government involvement, however, the Road Conditions Group instead advocated for a more hands-on approach by local community members. In their video, Maranda tells viewers, “This is a constant reminder from the government of promises that they do not keep. We need to take this into our own hands. We can come together as a community to raise funds, or we can save money to fix these roads” (RCG video). The group may critique the Jamaican government’s structures, but the video offer solutions that circumvent these structures, rather than challenging them. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2016: 7(2), 1-29 Finally, the AFS Security Group and LBC’s Abuses and Violence Group’s all researched and reported on systemic-level issues. Violence and abuse often require a justice-oriented approach in that these issues frequently necessitate social movement to invoke institutional and structural change. The students in these group begin to scratch this surface by suggesting “awareness campaigns” or “circulating petitions.” Their reactions suggests that the DPR process can serve as the initial stage for critical reflection and may need additional supports for participants to engage in praxis-oriented action (Cammarota & Fine, 2008; Friere, 2000). Global Competency One of my personal goals for this project was to seek ways to facilitate meaningful, cross- cultural communication between the students at AFS and at LBC. The cross-cultural dialogue we set up was our attempt to go beyond the superficial interactions often created by “pen-pal” programs, and connect students with overseas peers working on similar projects. The assumption was that intercultural collaboration should help the students better reflect on the participatory research process and examine how students experience issues at the glocal level. Unfortunately, our communication was somewhat limited throughout the project. For example, although Miss C. and I were able to work with the Jamaican students every day, Mr. B.’s interaction with the Cambridge students fluctuated as a result of AFS’ rotating schedule. Therefore, we only had opportunities to communicate every other day while we were overseas. Two of these interactions were interrupted due to internet connections. To compensate for the first interruption, each group of students filmed an “introductory video” describing their school, their interests, and the issues they were researching. The instructors were able to share the videos electronically overnight so that the students could learn from with their overseas partner groups the next day. Eventually, the LBC and AFS students suggested that we use the WhatsApp® application. Groups were paired up using this technology and could send short text messages to each other. Finally, I was able to share the LBC videos with the AFS students once returning to their school in May, and Miss C. returned to Jamaica with the AFS movies during June. Although the students were able to speak with their peers overseas, neither group demonstrated increases in “global awareness” about the other host country. Instead, this project seemed to reinforce pre-existing ideas. For example, Daniel stated, “I know there is violence in America. And I know the students [at AFS] mention this in their movies. But we found information on the internet about Jamaica as well. Jamaica is one of the top countries for violence” (individual Sarah A. MATHEWS 23 interview, 03/10/2015). The AFS students did ask questions about the Jamaican setting. Students wondered why only two male students participated in the project and asked “why the classrooms in Jamaica were louder” than their classrooms in America (observational notes, class discussion, 05/21/2015). Each group was aware of how their issues played out on a global scale but did not demonstrate learning substantive facts or information about the other nation. One theme that emerged was a recognition of “sameness”. For example, AFS student Faith noticed that groups from both schools focused on animal-related issues. She stated, “Even the road conditions group mentioned the impact of cars hitting animals. I think it is interesting that we all care about animals” (individual interviews, 05/22/2016). When LBC student Keisha viewed the project from her AFS peers, she formed a connection between the issues that students were addressing in South Florida and the trash issue that was occurring in Jamaica. Towards the end of our workshop, a major trash landfill in Kingston caught on fire. It took four days to extinguish the fire. In the meantime, schools and business were shut down over public concern over possible health issues. Keisha made the connection between this issue and what she viewed in the AFS projects saying, “It showed that every community has issues and that they can share it. Here in Jamaica, we have the dump that’s burning, affecting the children that can’t come to school. So garbage and littering is a big issue here too” (individual interview, 05/22/2016). Above all the students felt a comradery around having completed similar projects. Rafael addressed this in the following reflection: I think that we all make the community a better place, and also the world a better place. I definitely think that we are making an impact because we are reaching out to other kids in different countries. Right now we are reaching out to Jamaica, and hopefully, they are understanding our problems in our community as we are understanding their problems in their community. Discussion and Implications The cases presented in this research demonstrates how DPR helps adolescents develop glocal competency. The students were able to examine local issues while also understanding that many of these concerns also exist around the world. By examining the DPR process at two distinct locations, in Jamaica and South Florida, this research also highlights how context influences the way that individuals implement the methodology, the issues students address in their projects, and the types of solutions that youth develop. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2016: 7(2), 1-29 The students in this study did not necessarily learn a list of “facts” or “concepts” related to their specific civic-related issue or aspects of global awareness. The challenges of developing authentic intellectual work through digital documentary projects in the social studies have been countered and affirmed by scholars that have engaged in similar work (see Swan, Hofer & Swan, 2011 and Swan & Hofer, 2013 for this discussion). However, the students in this study were developing the skills promoted in the social studies inquiry arc. This is one stage in developing what Harshman (2016) refers to as critical global competence. Students were required to take a position on an issue and support this with credible sources. They also learned technical skills necessary to develop digital projects. Many of the groups communicated an awareness of societal issues and demonstrated a disposition towards wanting to participate in their community to promote positive change. Unfortunately, most of the DPR projects did not critically examine how global forces influence local issues. This missing critique suggests that while some students were able to develop critical civic competency (i.e. questioning whether or not the government will respond to local concerns) they were not necessarily developing critical global competency. Critical global competency would require students to examine “global power dynamics, inequity, privilege, and social justice,” (Harshman, 2016, p. 161). While students were learning to act within existing governmental systems, they were not learning to disrupt the local and global systems that produce violence and abuse or suppress solutions for change. Implications for theory and future research The results in this study suggest that students’ ideas about civic engagement do not always fit nicely into only one of Westheimer and Kahn’s (2004) typologies of citizenship. For example, many of the Jamaican students’ projects addressed structural issues and all three groups’ videos took more of an advocacy approach. However, in their individual interviews many of the students discussed more “participatory-oriented” approaches when they referenced holding community meetings or circulating petitions. The same could be said with the AFS students that focused on issues that could start with personally-responsible actions – i.e. picking up animal waste or litter. Students in these groups also discussed ways that citizens could participate in their community in order to make a more sustained impact in their society – i.e. present at a town hall meeting to discuss security or pollution. These results may expand or complicate Westheimer and Kahn’s Sarah A. MATHEWS 25 (2004) model. Further research should explore how students’ experiences fit within the gaps and overlaps of these three archetypes of citizenship. Unfortunately the students’ interaction with their overseas peers was not mutually reciprocal. This had limitations on the students’ ability to develop global competency. Participatory research could be designed to create scenarios where the students are directly working with their overseas peers on a mutually agreed upon problem. Creating a more structured interaction between the two groups may increase the participants’ opportunity to develop the three global learning outcomes. This adaptation to the project will also provide researchers the opportunity to further explore the potential for digital participatory research to facilitate global awareness, perspective, and engagement. Implications for Future Practice 1. Construct long-term projects: The 10-day workshop that we conducted with the Jamaican students did not facilitate an in-depth analysis of local or global issues. The AFS students were able to complete DPR process and create detailed multimedia projects within a semester-long course. However, we still do not know if either group would have also developed a deep level of glocal competency with only four months of communication with another cultural group. 2. Intentionally scaffold cross-cultural interactions: Teachers could create authentic cross- cultural learning experiences through the activities they create. “Getting-to-know-you Activities” are an important foundation to establishing these relationships. However, students could learn more by engaging in collaborative, problem-solving sessions. Groups could work together virtually to create projects examining how issues impact both countries or help each other problem-solve technological issues. 3. Teachers and students should prepare to use a variety of technological resources. When our internet went down we struggled to find other means to communicate. Youth can take a role in sharing online websites, applications or forms of social media that they use to communicate outside of the classroom. Although we struggled to have students Skype® within the classroom setting, our students were able to use WhatsApp® and communicate with their international peers outside of school. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2016: 7(2), 1-29 References Banks, J. A. (2007). Introduction: Democratic citizenship education in multicultural societies. In J. A. Banks (Ed.) Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspectives (pp. 3-16). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Brisland, B. M. (2012). The marginalization of social studies in elementary grades: An overview. In W. B. Russell (Ed.), Contemporary social studies: An essential reader (pp. 173–191). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Brooks, J. S. & Normore, A. H. (2010). Educational leadership and globalization: Literacy for a global perspectives. Educational Policy, 24(1), 52-82. Cahille, C., Rios-Moore, I., & Threatts, T. (2008). Different eyes/open eyes: Community-Based participatory action research. In J Cammarota & M. Fine (Eds.). Revolutionizing education: Youth participatory action research in motion (pp. 89-124). New York, NY: Routledge. Crocetti, E., Jahromi, P., & Meeus, W. (2012). Identity and civic engagement in adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 35(3), 521-532. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2011.08.003 Hacker, K. (2013). Community-based participatory research. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. ePals & Buck Institute for Education. (2014). Community photojournalists. Retrieved from: http://pblu.org/projects/community-photojournalists Evans, H. (2001). Inside Jamaican schools. Barbados: University of the West Indies Press. Ewald, W. & Lightfoot, A. (2002). I wanna take me a picture: Teaching photography and writing to children. Massachusetts, MA: Beacon Press. Fine, J. (2014). Visible thinking strategies. RED 6805 Syllabus: Practicum in Reading. Retrieved from: http://coe-syllabi.fiu.edu. Fitchett, P. G., Heafner, T. L., & Lambert, R. G. (2012). Examining elementary social studies marginalization: A multilevel model. Educational Policy, 28(1), 40-68. Fitchett, P. G., Heafner, T. L. & Lambert, R. G. (2014). Assessment, autonomy, and elementary social studies time. Teachers College Record, 116(10), 1-34. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E. & Hyun, H. H. (2014). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill. Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th ed.). New York, NY: Bloomsbury. Gee, J. P. (2004). What is critical in critical discourse analysis? In R. Rogers (Ed.), An Sarah A. MATHEWS 27 introduction to critical discourse analysis (pp. 19-50). Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Gubrium, A., & Harper, K. (2013). Participatory visual and digital methods. New York, NY: Routledge. Harshman, J. (2016). Critical global competence and the C3 in social studies education. The Social Studies, 107(5), 1-5. doi: 10.1080/00377996.2016.1190915 Hovland, K. (2006). Shared futures: Global learning and liberal education. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities. Jamaica Observer. (2013, October). Children’s advocate urges change in sexual abuse misconceptions. Retrieved from: wwww.jamaicaobserver.com/news/Children-s- advocate-urges-change-in-sexual-abus-misconceptions_17736667 Jamaican Gleaner. (2014, April). Bus conductor charged with the murder of 14-year-old pregnant girl. Retrieved from: http://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/news/20150409/bus- conductor-charged-murder-14-year-old-pregnant-girl Ladson-Billings, G. (2007). Culture versus citizenship: The challenge of racialized citizenship in the United States. In J. A. Banks (Ed.) Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspectives (pp. 99-126). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Luttrell, W. & Chalfen, R. (2010). Lifting up voices of participatory visual research. Visual Studies, 25(3), 197-200. Mathews, S. A. & Landorf, H. (2015). Global education 2.0: Can discussions of difference make a difference in an online format? In B. M. Maguth and J. Hilburn (Eds.) The state of global education: Learning with the world and its people (pp. 133-151). New York, NY: Routledge. Mathews, S.A. & Reid-Brown, C. (2015, November). “Out of many, one”: Jamaican teachers’ perspectives of global education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the College and University Faculty Assembly of the National Council for the Social Studies, New Orleans, LA.Mirra, N., Garcia, A., & Morrell, E. (2016). Doing participatory action research: Transforming inquiry with researchers, educators, and students. [Bookshelf Vital Source Electronic Edition]. New York, NY: Routledge. Mitra, D. L. & Serriere, S. C. (2012). Student voice in elementary school reform examining youth development in fifth graders. American Educational Research Journal, 49(4), 743- 774. doi: 10.3102/0002831212443079 Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2016: 7(2), 1-29 National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS). (2013). The college, career, and civic life (C3) framework for social studies state standards: Guidance for enhancing the rigor of K-12 civics, economics, geography, and history. Silver Springs, MD: NCSS. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards initiative: Preparing America’s students for college and career. Retrieved from: http://www.corestandards.org PhotoVoice. (2012a). Photovoice: Participatory photography for social change, vision and missionRetrieved from http://www.photovoice.org/about/info/vision-and-mission. PhotoVoice. (2012b). See it Our Way – Albania, Armenia, Lebanon, Romania, Pakistan (2010- 2011). Retrieved from http://www.photovoice.org/projects/international/see-it-our-way Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. Robertson, R. (1995). ‘Glocalization: Time-space and homogeneity-heterogeneity. In M. Featherston, S. Lash, & R. Robertson (Eds.). Global Modernities (pp. 25-44). London: Sage. Rock, T., Heafner, T., O’Conner, K., Passe, J., Oldendorf, S., Good, A., et al (2006). One state closer to a national crisis: A report on elementary social studies education in North Carolina Schools. Theory and Research in Social Education, 34(4), 455-483. doi: 10.1080/00933104.2006.10473318 Schenscul, J., & Dalglish, C. (2015). “A hard way out”: Improvisational film and youth participatory action research. In Gubrium, Harper, & Otañez (Eds.). Participatory visual and digital research in action. New York, NY: Routledge. Stake, R. E. (2006). Multiple case study analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Swan, K. & Hofer, M. (3013). Examining student-created documentaries as a mechanism for engaging students in authentic intellectual work. Theory & Research in Social Education, 41(1), 133-175. doi:10.1080/00933104.2013.758018 Swan, K., Hofer, M., & Swan, G. (2011). Examining authentic intellectual work with a social studies digital documentary inquiry project in a mandated state-testing environment. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27, 115-122. University of Cambridge & Miami-Dade County Schools. ( n.d.). Expanding opportunities with http://www.photovoice.org/projects/international/see-it-our-way Sarah A. MATHEWS 29 Cambridge programs. Retrieved from: http://pwbell.dadeschools.net/CambridgeOverview.pdf VanFossen, P. J. (2005). “Reading and math take so much of the time…” An overview of social studies instruction in elementary classrooms in Indiana. Theory and research in social education. 33(3), 376-403. doi: 10.1080/00933104.2005.10473287 Westheimer, J. & Kahne, J. (2004). What kind of citizen? The politics of educating for democracy. American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 237-269. doi: 10.3102/00028312041002237 Westheimer, J. & Kahne, J. (2006). The limits of political efficacy: Educating citizens for a democratic society. PS: Political Science & Politics, 39(02), 289-296. Notes 1 All of the names for the schools and identified participants are pseudonyms to protect the participants’ privacy. 2 All of the data here is pulled from the researcher’s university’s School of Education website that provides demographic data for all of the schools in the school district. http://pwbell.dadeschools.net/CambridgeOverview.pdf