“Not Present in Our Ranks”: Exploring Equitable Representation in Student Voice Efforts for Policy Change

Abstract

Background/Context: Increasingly, K–12 students are seeking to influence educational policies that directly affect their lives. As student intervention in policy increases, it is important to understand the composition of these groups and how they seek to exercise power and influence over policymakers. Purpose: This study sought to examine how two state-level student voice groups for policy change sought equitable representation in their composition. As student voice groups expand beyond school, city, or district level groups to focus on state- and national-level advocacy, the character of their composition takes on additional importance as they claim to speak on behalf of larger numbers of students. Setting: This study draws on interview, document analysis, and observation data from two student voice groups working to influence state-level legislative action on K–12 educational policy. Research Design: We combine secondary data analysis of data from state-level student voice groups with elements of duoethnography to explore how participants thought about, strived for, and fell short of equitable intra- group representation. Findings: We found that the members of both groups were personally committed to equity both in terms of group composition and advocacy. Additionally, group members had structures and policies—such as remote access and low barriers to entry—that encourage equitable representation. Participants reported a relational climate of inclusion. Despite these assets, outcomes were mixed: the groups successfully achieved racial and ethnic proportionality with the state, but remained predominantly urban and able- bodied in their composition. Conclusion: Despite the groups’ best efforts, group members’ challenges with distributed recruitment and emphasis on certain skills such as public speaking limited equitable outcomes in representation. This research makes clear that who is involved in the group at the outset and their network will shape representation. It also indicates that although technology can lower barriers to entry, it is not a panacea. Finally, this research reinforces the notion that students engage in self-policing of the group in order to gain greater legitimacy in the eyes of policymakers.

What Is Student Voice Anyway? The Intersection of Student Voice Practices and Shared Leadership

“…Intended Beneficiaries. Intended beneficiaries range from only the students involved in a student voice practice to all students in the school (Hipolito-Delgado & Zion, 2017; Holquist & Walls, 2021b; Keisu & Ahlström, 2020). For example, a school may host a “student voice conference,” where the intention is to support the leadership development and sense of agency of those who attend.…”

“…Student voice practices, however, disrupt these traditional power imbalances by authorizing students to voice their concerns, critiques, or alternative proposals (Halliday et al, 2019; Kennedy & Datnow, 2011; Lac & Cumings Mansfield, 2018; Mitra, 2018). Therefore, understanding the relationships between adult–student and student–student power dynamics is critical to understanding a student voice practice (Holquist & Walls, 2021b; Marsh, 2012; Silva, 2001).…”

“…Less than half of the articles reviewed (41%) discussed the access students had to participate in the student voice practice being studied; conversely, students, teachers, and school administrators all discussed access to student voice practices within their schools. Access ranged from broadly inclusive, involving all students in the school, to limited, engaging only a narrow subset of students (Downes et al, 2017; Hipolito-Delgado & Zion, 2017; Holquist & Walls, 2021b; Keisu & Ahlström, 2020). As an example, a student voice practice with high access might be a schoolwide student voice survey.…”

“…In addition to feasibility concerns, access may vary based upon the intent of a student voice practice (Hipolito-Delgado & Zion, 2017; Holquist & Walls, 2021b). For example, a practice emphasizing the voices of historically marginalized youth might not offer wide access to all students (Hipolito-Delgado & Zion, 2017).…”