El ciclo de las políticas públicas

Key policy documents such as the New Zealand Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2007) identified the future educational vision that young people “will be confident, connected, actively involved, lifelong learners” that contribute and participate in their communities (p. 7). Similarly, the Ministry of Youth Development’s Strategy Aotearoa (2007) prioritized the

development of skilled people to work with youth in a range of community contexts, to create strengths based opportunities for them to actively participate and engage.

The Secondary Futures Project (2008) described this as “community connectedness” (p.18). The school of the future was seen by Durie (2005), and others such as Bolstad and Gilbert (2012), as a hub that has many links into communities, agencies, businesses, and homes, where legitimate learning also occurs. As described in Jennings’ work presenting schools as community learning centres (2005), the school becomes “an educational broker in arranging, facilitating, guiding and monitoring learning activities beyond its walls” (p. 6). Gilbert (2005) even speculates that the traditional classroom as we know it will disappear and be replaced by small group encounters, collaborative projects.

However, there are both challenges and opportunities that arise from collaborating with a community organisation to deliver programmes. Cole (2010) suggests that in terms of teaching and learning, community-based education aims to make learning more relevant and meaningful to youth by situating it in local and familiar issues, contexts and challenges. She also argues that school-community partnerships have the potential to enrich, expand, and authenticate learning environments for youth and benefits such as increases in student attendance, graduation rates, parent participation and community unity.

Strong school-community partnerships involve people holding a common vision, and sharing information and power (Wheeler & Edlebeck, 2006). Cole (2010) asserts that educators and administrators must find ways to remove traditional barriers between schools and communities, and allow youth to participate in active, authentic work outside school walls. The development of authentic learning opportunities moving beyond school

walls and out into the community is beginning to occur. For example, Wood’s (2011) investigation into New Zealand youths’ place-based perspectives on participation in society provided secondary school teachers and their students with opportunities to collaborate purposefully with their community that ways that encouraged meaningful participatory citizenship and broadened their contexts for learning. Such an exemplar demonstrates participatory, future-focussed educational values similar to the community partnership within which this research project is based, by providing an authentic, inclusive and innovative context for youth leadership learning to occur.

YOUTH-ADULT PARTNERSHIPS

Developing partnerships between youth and adults is a key component in 21st _{century education provision, wherever that learning takes place} (Bolstad, 2008). Youth leadership development in a community context can facilitate respectful and productive partnerships between adults and young people. Finn and Checkoway (1998) suggest that one of the key components of exemplary community-based programmes is collaborative partnerships between a diverse community of youth and adults. This often means adults relinquishing power and actively sharing decision-making responsibility. Des Marais et al (2000) argue that contrary to the ageist, hierarchical belief that chaos will then ensue, “partnerships where young people and adults share learning and leadership allow them to become co- creators of community” (p. 680). Generating these partnerships ensures that leadership entails more than a simple relationship of dominance or influence, becoming instead a collective process of “meaning making” by a community engaged in a task (Roach et al., 1999).

Youth who feel valued, respected and effective while participating within community contexts report many positive impacts including: a sense of

purpose and agency to make a difference, self-efficacy, social responsibility, appreciation of diversity, and community connectedness (Metzger, 2007). Gambone, Hanh, Lewis-Charp, Sipe, and Lacoe (2006) note that promoting high quality youth leadership and community involvement experiences requires well-trained staff, time, and resources. They warn practitioners that it is important to have thought through key issues such as power imbalances between adults and youth, what roles youth can and should play in their organizations and community, the skills and knowledge that staff need, and the skills and support that youth need to be effective leaders within community contexts.

The issue of practitioner influence is all-important. Bragg (2013) asserts that in order to be effective, practitioners in the area of youth leadership development need to be inclusive, compassionate and competent. It is important that practitioners resist the ‘adultism’ of seeing themselves as experts (MacNeil, 2006). A crucial part of the competence required for leadership mentors and teachers is an awareness of how much agency youth are entitled to and the fact that they must resist the temptation to wield power - even when failure looms - since exercising power over developing leaders effectively shuts down the development process (Mitra, 2006). Such intervention can remove agency from youth by restricting opportunities and ownership for meaningful contributions or changes around important community issues that affect them. As McNae (2010) notes, this is a delicate balance, requiring skilled facilitation and practitioner self-awareness.

Quality youth-adult partnerships could be particularly important for youth who may be disassociated from their school community and/or family, or have cultural needs or connections that transcend the traditional contexts for leadership opportunities (McLaren, 2002). For example, within a New

Zealand context, a young Maori (or native New Zealander) who is a minority at school and feels disconnected from a traditional, individualistic and competitive Euro-centric or Western model of education and school leadership, may be more likely to become involved in a community context where the tikanga (or cultural values) align more with her/his own, and where notions of whanaungatanga (building relationships) and manaakitanga (collective wellbeing) take precedence over individual influence and success (Ware & Walsh-Tapiata, 2010).

Whatever the context, youth who participate in leadership development opportunities are seeking to build their capacities to be effective and engaged citizens in that context and that moment, and also for future roles and environments (Des Marais et al., 2000; Fertman & van Linden, 1998). Considering this, it is critical that the leadership opportunities they are afforded are purposefully designed in ways that respect and meet their developmental, personal and cultural needs. One way to mediate this is to engage young people in collaborative partnerships where their voices are sought as a means to best meet their needs.