Youth Civic Engagement Needs Better Systems

Tarun (Raman) Parthasarathy

I just want to dispel a big myth: students ARE NOT APATHETIC. In fact, though generation Z and after (on the decline) has around an 8-second attention span (McKinsey), we often want to engage more with the environment around us and internalize deep information. Our civic engagement is also associated with positive outcomes for both youth and communities as a whole, and protests around social issues often lead to reform (Ballard et. al). But due to the rise of Large Language Models (LLMs) and Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), new models are left to analyze large swathes of often (personal) videos, photos, location data, and descriptors, which can be used to form a complete identity of a person without even seeing them once directly! It’s surprisingly common, and time-sinking, thereby deterring us from being present.

The key obstacle that is stopping us from being engaged with what affects us is actually that itself: an abundance of information from different sources. It’s now virtually impossible to discern misinformation from genuine knowledge as it spreads like wildfire through social media platforms and by word of mouth. It doesn’t help that in some Californian schools, teachers have high expectations and with that comes a boatload of academic pressure, internally and externally, to succeed in either arts, sports, and/or academics. After even this paragraph, you must be thinking, “HUH?” And fairly so; with way too much to process around us, there’s less time for truly fulfilling youth activities that create any amount of societal or behavioral change. Not helping this is that youth systems are often scattered, unclear, and performance-based instead of impact-oriented. For organizations and associations, they may define clear objectives if led by a strong leader, but fail to actually make an impact beyond their local community, or even crumble once the founder has left. To change this, we need support from willing adults to advise the outreach of these programs, and accountability from its members to be more than just there for a line on a college résumé. 

A great example is the CAYC, which started as a small youth collection of commissions co-founded by siblings Rohan and Anya Dalal (current chair). By expanding the amount of commissions and bringing in both accomplished speakers and novel youth ideas to conferences, there is now a pipeline for thoughts to become action, and I’m proud to be part of the leadership team that supports this! Next, the youth voice needs more than passion: it needs actual follow-through, because no legislators will listen to seemingly childish points of view (visionary or not), due to the stereotype of ill-informed, naïve children. That activism continues to open up pathways for ridicule, discouraging the rising generation to be outspoken as a result. 

Adding fuel to the fire, since youth technically aren’t “constituents,” it’s harder for representatives to make legislation keeping our interests in mind; however, the fact that we will be active taxpayers and voters in just a few years (if not less) goes in one ear and out the other. Often, the older generation advocates for tax cuts or social stability over education reforms and guardrails around new hot topics such as mental health or artificial intelligence. That oversight leads to a lack of community among youth, as these programs are nonexistent, and although many bright pioneering students start initiatives, they don’t often reach scale. To fix this injustice while being measured, a comprehensive local youth-serving system must be put into place, where all youth are engaged in learning in classrooms and training, their workplace and community, receive individualized and community support, are visible and active in leadership roles, and participate in an equitable and coordinated system that meets the needs of youth. 

The first cornerstone is academic achievement, wherein adults promote high academic and technical success, workplace experiences support classroom learning, multiple educational approaches address individual needs, and standards-based alternatives are available at all levels of education; the second, career development, wherein early employment exposure and experiences are provided, quality work-based learning opportunities are in place, community and workplace partners provide work and learning opportunities, and classroom learning supports career development; the third, community services and support, wherein all youth have safe and stable living arrangements, strong and enduring adult and peer connections, a full range of social services, and receive life skills training and practice; the last, youth leadership, wherein youth actively participate in decisions about their lives, drive policy and decision making, are encouraged and supported in leadership roles, and leverage leadership opportunities. 

In summary, for a foundational youth development approach to be a connected, operational structure to support youth success, the implementation of all activities must embody an individualized youth development approach, guide youth-centered programs and services, support collaboration from community leadership, make use of existing resources, respond to individual and cultural differences, and support a focus on youth issues. Then and only then will a grassroots system for toddler to adolescents emerge and foment a capable next generation that will be able to manage stressors and deliver passion in combination with sound reasoning. 

Image credit: https://youthtoday.org/2025/05/re-centering-youth-work-across-systems/

Bibliography

Karen Pittman, publisher and editor-in-chief. “YouthToday.Org.” Youth Today, 30 May 2025, https://youthtoday.org/2025/05/re-centering-youth-work-across-systems/.

to Work, New Ways. “All Youth-One System - New Ways to Work.” New Ways to Work, 15 Apr. 2018, https://www.newwaystowork.org/all-youth-one-system/. Accessed 13 July 2026.

Ballard, Jaime, et al. “Program Quality Components Related to Youth Civic Engagement.” Children and Youth Services Review, vol. 126, Apr. 2021, p. 106022, 10.1016/j.childyouth.2021.106022.

Zaff, Jonathan F., et al. “Developmental Trajectories of Civic Engagement Across Adolescence: Disaggregation of an Integrated Construct.” Journal of Adolescence, vol. 34, no. 6, 22 Nov. 2011, pp. 1207–1220, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/s0140197111000765, 10.1016/j.adolescence.2011.07.005. Accessed 13 July 2026.

“Youth Lack Community Connections That Are Critical to Civic Engagement.” Tufts.Edu, 3 Dec. 2025, https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/youth-lack-community-connections-are-critical-civic-engagement. Accessed 13 July 2026.

Jones, Lisa. “Youth Civic Engagement Has Lasting Benefits.” International Youth Foundation, 2024, https://archive.iyfglobal.org/blog/youth-civic-engagement-has-lasting-benefits. Accessed 13 July 2026.

Sutter, Jessica, and Audra Watson. “The State of Youth Civic Engagement.” NASBE - National Association of State Boards of Education, 2025, https://www.nasbe.org/the-state-of-youth-civic-engagement/. Volume 25, No. 4