Fostering Democratic Participation at Community Colleges: Understanding the Relationship Between Voting and Student, Institutional, and Environmental Factors

IF 1.7 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Jon Mcnaughtan, M. Brown
{"title":"Fostering Democratic Participation at Community Colleges: Understanding the Relationship Between Voting and Student, Institutional, and Environmental Factors","authors":"Jon Mcnaughtan, M. Brown","doi":"10.1177/0091552120926250","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The purpose of this study is to understand the relationship between organizational characteristics, state political climate, and student civic engagement at community colleges, operationalized in this article as student voting. Method: Utilizing a unique cross-sectional dataset compiled by the Institute for Democracy & Higher Education for the 2012 and 2016 presidential elections that merges student voting data, enrollment records from the National Student Clearinghouse, and institutional data from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, we employed multi-level binary logistic regression to account for individual and organizational influences. Results: The relationship between voting and student characteristics aligns with national voting trends, in that students who are female, older, and White had higher odds of voting. However, there was one notable exception in 2012 where Black students had higher odds of voting than their White peers. We also found that students enrolled full-time and those enrolled at colleges in electoral battleground states were more likely to vote in 2012 and 2016. Weak or mixed relationships emerged between voting and environmental factors such as campaign spending, ballot initiatives, get-out-the-vote programs, restrictive voter laws, and compositional diversity of the student body. Conclusion: This study provides insight for community college leaders on potential ways to engage students in an effort to promote voter turnout in a presidential election year on their campuses. Specifically, we posit that institutions could highlight the salience of public policy issues for students, lobby for less restrictive voting laws, and implement evaluation programs of their civic engagement initiatives.","PeriodicalId":46564,"journal":{"name":"Community College Review","volume":"48 1","pages":"355 - 375"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0091552120926250","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Community College Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552120926250","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study is to understand the relationship between organizational characteristics, state political climate, and student civic engagement at community colleges, operationalized in this article as student voting. Method: Utilizing a unique cross-sectional dataset compiled by the Institute for Democracy & Higher Education for the 2012 and 2016 presidential elections that merges student voting data, enrollment records from the National Student Clearinghouse, and institutional data from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, we employed multi-level binary logistic regression to account for individual and organizational influences. Results: The relationship between voting and student characteristics aligns with national voting trends, in that students who are female, older, and White had higher odds of voting. However, there was one notable exception in 2012 where Black students had higher odds of voting than their White peers. We also found that students enrolled full-time and those enrolled at colleges in electoral battleground states were more likely to vote in 2012 and 2016. Weak or mixed relationships emerged between voting and environmental factors such as campaign spending, ballot initiatives, get-out-the-vote programs, restrictive voter laws, and compositional diversity of the student body. Conclusion: This study provides insight for community college leaders on potential ways to engage students in an effort to promote voter turnout in a presidential election year on their campuses. Specifically, we posit that institutions could highlight the salience of public policy issues for students, lobby for less restrictive voting laws, and implement evaluation programs of their civic engagement initiatives.
培养社区大学的民主参与:理解投票与学生、制度和环境因素之间的关系
目的:本研究的目的是了解社区大学的组织特征、州政治气候和学生公民参与之间的关系,本文将其作为学生投票。方法:利用民主与高等教育研究所为2012年和2016年总统选举汇编的一个独特的横断面数据集,该数据集融合了学生投票数据、国家学生信息交换所的入学记录和综合中学后教育数据系统的机构数据,我们采用多层次二元逻辑回归来考虑个人和组织的影响。结果:投票和学生特征之间的关系与全国投票趋势一致,女性、年长和白人学生的投票几率更高。然而,2012年有一个明显的例外,黑人学生的投票几率高于白人学生。我们还发现,在2012年和2016年,全日制入学的学生和在选举战场州的大学入学的学生更有可能投票。投票与环境因素之间出现了薄弱或混合的关系,如竞选支出、投票倡议、退出投票计划、限制性选民法和学生群体的组成多样性。结论:这项研究为社区大学领导提供了深入的见解,让他们了解如何让学生参与进来,努力在校园里的总统选举年提高选民投票率。具体而言,我们假设各机构可以强调公共政策问题对学生的重要性,游说限制较少的投票法,并实施对其公民参与倡议的评估计划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Community College Review
Community College Review EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
7.70%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: The Community College Review (CCR) has led the nation for over 35 years in the publication of scholarly, peer-reviewed research and commentary on community colleges. CCR welcomes manuscripts dealing with all aspects of community college administration, education, and policy, both within the American higher education system as well as within the higher education systems of other countries that have similar tertiary institutions. All submitted manuscripts undergo a blind review. When manuscripts are not accepted for publication, we offer suggestions for how they might be revised. The ultimate intent is to further discourse about community colleges, their students, and the educators and administrators who work within these institutions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信