IANYS Global Conference Update

As the Secretariat for the International Association of National Youth Service (IANYS), Innovations in Civic Participation would like to invite all of our blog readers, national youth service advocates, and youth service volunteers around the world to attend IANYS’ 8th Global Conference on National Youth Service in Paris, France on November 19-22! Along with ICP, Unis-Cité and the Association of Voluntary Service Organizations (AVSO) will be hosting this international conference for all professionals involved in youth development and service. The conference will include four days of training sessions on policy and programming, workshops given by experts on policymaking, research, and volunteerism, site visits to local youth development organizations, networking, and receiving the latest materials on youth development.

Here at ICP we are very excited to announce that one of the conference’s keynote speakers is Kumi Naidoo, the current CEO and Secretary General of CIVICUS, a Rhodes Scholar, an appointee on the UN’s Persons Group on United Nations-Civil Relations, and former South African anti-apartheid activist. CIVICUS is an international coalition of over 500 organizations promoting civic engagement around the world. He has been a civilian activist against since the age of 15 when he protested apartheid in South Africa which he was later imprisoned and since then, he’s been active in several campaigns promoting social justice and fighting global poverty. He also writes extensively.

Past IANYS conferences have had participants from 48 different countries amongst the on-average 50 participants. However this year, we are hoping for these numbers to grow. All IANYS members are invited as well as anyone interested in learning, researching, or implementing national youth service policy or programs. For more information on the conference, including registration and accommodations for the conference, please visit ICP’s website.

Deadly Youth Riots Erupt in Kenya

Over the weekend, more violent riots broke out in secondary boarding schools across Kenya. Numerous dormitories were vandalized and burned, leading to one death in Nairobi and roughly 200 arrests. The upheaval has caused 200 schools to be closed across the country in the last 3 months. Articles from AllAfrica.com and BBC have attempted to explain why young students across the country are violently protesting school administrations by destroying millions of dollars of property and killing a classmate. One student blamed the upcoming mock exams. Some have blamed overcrowding since the government’s recent increases in school attendance due to a new bill offering free secondary education to over a million students, while others eye complaints of poor food quality for boarders and unbearable rules enforced by the administration. Meanwhile, the Ministry of Education blames a ban on corporal punishment passed 5 years ago for creating a nation of undisciplined and violent youth.

How does this crisis relate to youth service or national youth service policy? Kenya’s situation exemplifies the significance and challenges behind how a government views and treats its youth population. The events have highlighted a clear communication breakdown between the youth and the government. The current government is in transition from a punishment-based education system to a modern education policy based on expansion through equality. This change and potential instability alongside major education initiatives cannot be understated. Although Kenya’s education minister, Sam Ongeri, had good intentions in paying the tuition for 1.4 million more students this year, Kenyan infrastructure has been as of yet unable to support this expansion and as a result, the youth cannot be expected to tolerate insufferable learning and living conditions. In dealing with these issues, Kenyan youth need to find and be helped to find a voice and stake in their futures as citizens.

Kenya does have a national youth service policy that was instated shortly after independence. However, the service policy is focused on internal security, recruiting police officers and members of the military. In June of this year, the National Youth Service budget was increased by $3 billion, creating 15,000 more jobs – 8,000 police, 1,000 nurses, and 6,000 teachers, illustrating the government’s emphasis on primarly internal security. This is reasonable since Kenya has experienced violent social turmoil due to elections and youth discontent in the last year. Thus, the government treats the youth as both a security liability and the answer to security. This measure is divisive, as there are youths in government service under the national youth policy attempting to control the civilian youths fighting to have their grievances heard. In considering a means to achieving sustainable peace in Kenya, the need for the 8,000 police and $3 billion budget increase could be diminished if youth programs for service were created to proactively address the students’ issues. These could include after-school programs that build schools, teach food preparation, hold gardening classes to improve quality of produce, or the planning and hosting of youth conferences discussing national testing and elections. Of course this is the idealistic approach: Kenya’s youth improving school’s food quality while learning to garden or sitting at a round-table to discuss the unfairness of national tests. This would mean the government’s perspective on youth would again need to transition from viewing the youth as a group that needs to be controlled to a group that has a positive and active role as well as acknowledging the group’s potential contributions to the democracy.

Until productive strategies and programs are in place, successful public schooling will be a dream, just as independence from oppressive colonial leadership was nearly 60 years ago. Weathering the storm of change towards progress instead of reverting back to older systems will push Kenya towards a more inclusive democracy. National youth service programs based on community welfare could be the peaceful means for Kenyan youth to publicize their grievances and help incorporate Kenya’s youth into a more consolidated democracy.

Music National Service Initiative (MNSi) and the Music Service Corps Proposal—A Logical Next Step for National Youth Service Policy?

A recent Blog by Kiff Gallagher on Huffington Post explores the merits of creating a national service to bring music to underprivileged areas of the United States. Gallagher reports on the Music National Service Initiative’s MusicianCorps, which would attempt to foster the “critical skills a child develops when she struggles with her instrument, writes a song, joins a band or finds her voice in a choir”—skills that would help a young boy or girl succeed and contribute to the economy and help address future challenges. These capabilities are also what employers in high-end industries look for in their search for productive, flexible, adaptive and imaginative employees.

The correlation between engaged and active youth and music education has been proven in a variety of instances. Involvement in the arts results in lower rates of recidivism, 17% higher rates of graduation and better test scores in English and science. This is due, in no small part, to the fact that young men and women love music. In a MTV survey cited by Gallagher, teens said that music “defines them more than family, moral values, religion and style.” MusicianCorps would provide a medium through which successful and more affluent people could connect and impact society for the greater good—transcending social and economic boundaries.

This truly innovative route towards civic participation deserves support and advocacy from any service oriented non-profit. Already on board with the MNSi’s proposal are City Year and ServiceNation, who are both organizational partners. This group, led by MNSi, has begun to push legislators for consideration of an Artist or Music service along with current GreenCorps and HealthCorps Initiatives. MusicianCorps is a logical addition to US national youth service policy in the spirit of the founders of AmeriCorps.

Botswana Announces 5th Annual Youth Awards

Rewarding Youth Service is important in motivating increased participation. Botswana has taken a lead in nationally recognizing youths and projects that have made a difference in local communities. Earlier this week the Botswana Ministry of Youth, Sport and Culture announced the start of the process to nominate and give out their 5th Annual Youth Awards.

Ministry arranges 5th youth awards

Staff Writer

The Ministry of Youth, Sport and Culture, through the Department of Culture and Youth, will be hosting the 5th Botswana National Youth Service Awards this year.

The awards ceremony will be held on 28 November. As the National Youth Service awards seek to recognise all deserving youth nationwide, the department has started mobilising the youth to nominate their projects for the exercise. The awards seek to reward young people who make a difference in their communities in terms of development and empowerment.

The awards are for projects that have been primarily thought, planned and carried out by the youth and also individuals or youth groups whose services and objectives are aimed at youth development.

The theme for this year's awards ceremony is: "Young People's Active Participation in National Development Processes: An imperative".

Entry forms are obtainable from all District Youth offices countrywide. The completed forms should be hand-delivered to the District Youth offices by 25 July, which is the deadline.

Youth Service requires motivated membership, and awards are especially effective in achieving this goal. National recognizance also increases visibility of the programs and projects, helping involve non-profits and stimulate funding. Indirect forms of compensation are pivotal in successful Youth Service Programs, as evidenced by the scholarships and tax credits given to members in countries across the world. Botswana's 5th Annual National Youth Service Awards are an effective example of this strategy for increasing participation.

The Millennial Generation: Serving Main Street or Wall Street?

A recent New York Times article by Sara Rimer has again raised the question of the civic role of our nation’s elite universities and their privileged graduates. The article examines the perception that a growing number of Harvard graduates are forgoing careers in public service (or at least public interest) for more lucrative jobs on Wall Street with hedge funds, investment banks, and consulting firms. According to the article, 20 percent of Harvard graduates were heading into financial services and management consulting this year. As Harvard education professor Howard Gardener put it, “Is this what a Harvard education is for? Are Ivy League schools simply becoming selecting mechanisms for Wall Street?” To many of us who have never been part of the “Ivy League” the professor’s shock seems somewhat ironic—“becoming,” really, becoming? After feeling slighted for approximately 30 seconds when I failed to make the “Ivy” cut I proceeded to one of thousands of other extremely rigorous private or public institutions that dot the American higher education landscape, where I received an education worthy (I think) of any investment bank or federal agency. But I digress. Perhaps Professor Gardener and Harvard’s new president Drew Gilpin Faust are on to something? Certainly they are not the only ones to worry about the supply of qualified public servants.

In May Representatives David Price (D-NC) and Christopher Shays (R-CT) introduced H.R. 6160 The Roosevelt Scholars Act of 2008 to establish a scholarship program to encourage outstanding graduate students in “mission critical” fields to pursue a career in the federal government. The legislation would provide for the cost of graduate tuition for up to 5 years of study in exchange for at least 3 and not more than 5 years of service in “mission critical” federal positions (Mission-critical positions are those a federal agency identifies as essential to achieving its core functions). According to the Office of Personnel Management, approximately one third of the government’s top scientists, engineers, physicians, mathematicians, economists, and other highly specialized professionals will be retiring in the next five years. A report by the Partnership for Public Service suggests that over the next two years, our largest federal agencies project that they will hire nearly 193,000 new workers for "mission-critical" jobs.

What seems apparent is that the retirement of baby boomers, particularly those in public service will create an enormous demand for a new generation of civil servants. However, the rising cost of a college degree and the growth of student debt combined with the difference in compensation between Main Street and Wall Street is bound to push graduates towards private gain at the expense of the public good. Now, I am all for private gain, but I am also for individual choice, and I know that some graduates, if given the choice (i.e. it was financially viable) would select a career in public service. Money aside, there is of course the question of the relative ‘prestige’ associated with the two career paths, but on the whole I think the relative prestige tends to reflect the differing financial rewards rather than say, an underlying cultural value in favor of derivatives trading. Perhaps, (it certainly cannot be ruled out) I am woefully out of touch with the present culture. Otherwise it would seem the question is one of incentives: Are public servants sufficiently compensated? Are investment bankers over-paid (as the shareholders of Bear Sterns)? Should graduates pursuing careers in public service (as opposed to financial services) receive the same support in their course of study?

Regardless of where you come down on the first two questions I think most people could agree that it is in the public interest for public monies (in this case federal financial aid) to give preference (the two should not be mutually exclusive) to students who in turn intend to pursue a career in public service. And on the whole I think most people would agree that it is in partial fulfillment of their civic role that University’s offer financial assistance to students interested in public service that may not be available to students on other career paths.

Thus, the most sensible means of adequately staffing public agencies and encouraging a new generation to consider public service is to incentivize education in exchange for service. Doing so could take the form of the Price-Shays legislation that would award scholarships in exchange for federal service. It could also include increasing the AmeriCorps education award and tying it more closely to the rising cost of a four year degree (as opposed to the CPI) as Senator Dodd’s National Service Legislation would. The new GI Bill is another means. Or perhaps the creation of a U.S. Public Service Academy--based on the model of the military academies—which would train an elite cadre of dedicated civil servants (the Academy similarly noted and responded to the Times article).

Finally the examples set by Universities like Amherst, Tufts, and U Penn should inspire other institutions to consider their own civic roles (Tufts will pay off student loans for graduates who choose public service professions). It’s time for the folks at Harvard to quit their hand-wringing, put their money where their mouth is (all $ 36 billion) and follow the example of innovators like Tufts. Maybe then the John F Kennedy School can again claim to be a school of government.

National Service Continues to be an Important Election Issue

Using the July 4th holiday as a pulpit, presumptive Democratic Nominee for President Barack Obama's July 2nd speech at CU-Colorado Springs has continued to consolidate and strengthen his argument for increased patriotic service by every American.



Obama backs the current bipartisan GI Bill introduced by Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) and called for an Educational Tax Credit to motivate increased civic engagement. Obama's vocal support of service legislation is coupled with public calls for a reorientation of American society--"We were ready to step into the strong current of history, and to answer a new call for our country. But the call never came. Instead of a call to service, we were asked to go shopping."

This is the most important and progressive part of Obama's National Service platform--for the first time in recent memory a high level American political leader has made a concise appeal to our patriotic instincts and coupled it with feasible legislation to motivate increased civic engagement. Support and acknowledgment of the power of youth civic engagement and service learning is the first step towards educating a generation of young men and women on the merits of positive and constructive patriotism.

Article Addressing McCain and National Service

The Zimbabwe National Youth Service and the 2008 Election: Lessons for the National Service Community

In recent days, the political climate in Zimbabwe has continued to deteriorate, as hopes for a peaceful democratic transition have been dashed. Last week, in the face of growing violence and repression, opposition leader and presidential candidate Morgan Tsvangirai withdrew from the Presidential Election Runoff between himself and President Robert Mugabe. Although election monitoring is not typically within ICP’s purview, the role of the faulty Zimbabwe National Youth Service (NYS) in a campaign of state-sponsored repression and violence against the opposition Movement for Democratic Change clearly necessitates ICP’s comment.

Zimbabwe’s National Service Act of 1979 created rules for who could be incorporated into the Zimbabwe National Youth Service and the military; however, it was not until 2001 that a formal NYS program was created. The Service was created as an alternative to school for 10-30 year-olds and was intended to be a gateway to national economic and social development. The Zimbabwe National Youth Policy states in part that,

“It is acknowledged that the development of young people in Zimbabwe requires the involvement of different groups and sectors. The National Youth Policy, therefore provides a means whereby these different sectors (Government, Non-Government, Community, and Private) as well as young people themselves, can work together to achieve common goals.”

However, the function of Zimbabwe’s NYS has diverged from its mission as stated in the 1979 Service Act. For example, many of the camps have been shown to be centers for political indoctrination and military training that serve as a pipeline to the ruling party militias, called the Zimbabwean African National Union Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF). Zimbabwean youth are drawn to NYS by the promise and advantage of better work opportunities, as many jobs only consider candidates with NYS alumni status. However once in the NYS camps, many members encounter brutal conditions and are coerced into learning military skills.¹ According to The 2008 Child Soldiers Report published by The Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers,

“Training centres provided militia training in a 120-day program for 1,000 young people at a time, although numbers declined as the economic and food crisis intensified in the country. Several thousand children and young persons had received training by March 2007. Training focused on paramilitary skills and political education, and allegedly included torture and killing techniques. It was reported that girls were repeatedly raped by other trainees and staff.”

Rather than contribute to the socioeconomic development of the nation, ZANU-PF sponsored groups have been used in order to intimidate, injure and kill political rivals since as early as the 2002 Presidential election. Firsthand accounts, verified that “uniformed graduates of the youth service” perpetrated violence against opposition political supporters. This trend has continued up until present, as the ruling party has continued to use the NYS to perpetrate acts of aggression towards political rivals and supporters. According to the 2008 Child Soldiers Report,

“Youth militia, as well as ruling-party supporters and the army, were used to intimidate the opposition in the 2005 elections. Youth militias were also deployed in “Operation Sunrise”, in which they harassed motorists and commuters when a new currency was introduced in 2006. Violence involving youth militia intensified from March 2007, with reports of beatings, abductions and arbitrary detention targeting opposition figures. Militias were used to enforce price controls, especially from mid-2007 in “Operation Reduce Prices”, when youth militias were sent to enforce price reductions of 50 per cent by supermarkets, shops and stalls. Allegations of political intimidation and attacks on opposition supporters, forced displacement, killings, torture, rape and the destruction of property by members of ZANU–PF youth militias continued up to the end of 2007.”

Not surprisingly, this violence has carried over to the hotly contested 2008 election—during the time between the disputed outcome and the resultant runoff, at least 80 opposition supporters have been killed and 10,000 people injured as well as twice as many homes destroyed, and over 200,000 displaced by the violence. This has culminated in the withdrawal of opposition presidential candidate Morgan Tsvangirai from the race citing danger to both the survival of his party, The Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) and his supporters. Tsvangirai was quoted as saying, "Zimbabweans . . . have withstood years of brutality, impoverishment and intimidation. But we in the MDC cannot ask them to cast their votes on June 27 when that vote could cost them their lives."

The Zimbabwean Ministry of Youth Development and Employment Creation has denied opposition accusations that its members have participated in and helped organize the recent political violence. They maintain that NYS programs instill patriotism, discipline and self esteem in the members and are much like the National Youth Service programs in the US and other western countries. However, what separates Zimbabwean NYS from effective youth service programs like AmeriCorps and the South African NYS is the methodology used for reaching these goals.

National Youth Service as a concept is vastly different from what the Zimbabwean government has applied in practice. Innovations in Civic Participation defines National Youth Service as “A civilian program in which young people spend several months meeting local communities’ needs in exchange for minimal financial compensation. National youth service programs provide young people with training, essential self-knowledge, skills, and hands-on experience.” National Youth Service in the Zimbabwean context means service towards the support of the ruling party resulting often in violent action to suppress opposition politics, which itself is a violation of the human rights that youth civic engagement is meant to express.

The National Youth Service (NYS) of Zimbabwe is a corruption of the ideals of National Youth Service. Civic engagement is meant to be constructive, yet the actions of the Zimbabwean NYS are divisive, counterproductive and have corrupted at least a generation of young men and women—teaching them that fear and violence are the way to achieve change.

International experts fear that the rampant political indoctrination and militarization occurring in Zimbabwe will lead to ethnic cleansing and civil war. NYS programs require effective oversight, funding and participation to achieve positive changes for countries and for young and eager participants. NYS is meant to promote positive and active engagement to improve society and hold leadership accountable. The Zimbabwean NYS has achieved the opposite, through youth engagement in ways that rupture the fabric of society and support the ruling doctrine. Youth Service should serve as an environment for the incubation of one’s own political ideals, cultivated around an understanding of shared fate and community responsibility.

Zimbabwe’s problems prove how powerful youth groups can be. When this collective strength and eagerness is harnessed correctly, important community building can result. However, when they are formed with ulterior motives, for political indoctrination or as a militaristic youth corps, NYS groups become powerful tools against community building, inclusive government and peaceful society—fighting against the very goals of youth service and service-learning initiatives across the world.

1 Rejoice Shumba’s “Social Identities in the National Youth Service of Zimbabwe” is an extensive exploration of how exactly the Zimbabwean NYS operates.

National Service and the Presumptive Republican and Democratic Nominees for President

After June 3rd, the US Presidential race is down to two major-party candidates, John McCain of the Republican Party and Barack Obama of the Democratic Party. McCain and Obama have both shown a willingness to discuss the expansion of AmeriCorps and new ideas for national and community service in the US. Here at ICP, we have paid close attention to their platforms, as the future of National Service both in the US and abroad is contingent upon the policies of the two candidates.

Both candidates have called for young men and women to serve their country in some capacity—in the armed forces, AmeriCorps, or the Peace Corps. Along with this call, the candidates have proposed implementing specific new program initiatives and policy changes in order to achieve the goal of increased civic engagement, though Obama’s platform is more comprehensive than McCain’s.

John McCain voted against the AmeriCorps bill in 1993, but later became an advocate for the expansion of AmeriCorps. In 2003, he cosponsored the “Call to Service” bill with Senator Evan Bayh, which would have vastly increased the size of AmeriCorps and the Peace Corps and provided monetary compensation for the work.

However, more recently his support has waned as he has admittedly focused more on security issues. In 2005, he called for US citizens, even those who oppose the war, to contribute 2 years of service to the United States as an act of patriotism. In an Op-Ed in the Dallas Morning News, McCain wrote:

“There are few greater ways of infusing your life with meaning than by spending two or more years in the service of your nation. The military obviously forms an exceptional way to serve America and our ideals, but it is not the only route. The Peace Corps and AmeriCorps also provide excellent and fulfilling ways to serve.”

At present, the Republican candidate’s major policy initiative related to civic service is his support of “Troops-to-Teachers,” which creates incentives for returning military service people to transition into careers in teaching. In a March 15th, 2008 speech in Columbus, Ohio, McCain spoke about his vision for National Service and the US educational system in 2013:

“Public education in the United States is much improved thanks to the competition provided by charter and private schools; the increase of quality teachers through incentives like merit pay and terrific programs that attract to the classroom enthusiastic and innovative teachers from many disciplines, like Teach for America and Troops to Teachers.”

Although vocally supportive of AmeriCorps and Teach for America (an AmeriCorps program), McCain has failed to present a dynamic and thorough policy for expanding and funding these programs. When asked by ServeNext (an organization dedicated to advocating for increasing the visibility of National Service programs as well as funding them) to sign their “Presidential Pledge to Expand National Service¹,” McCain declined, saying, “I stand on my record, not on pledges.”

On the other side of the aisle, Barack Obama not only signed the ServeNext Pledge, but has also developed a more comprehensive proposal to address the need for national youth service and civic engagement. On his website, Obama has a page dedicated to service under his “Issues” section. Here, Obama details his plan for improving support and funding for National Youth Service Programs.

One of his major initiatives would include expanding AmeriCorps from 75,000 slots annually to 250,000, as well as doubling the size of the Peace Corps. Obama also provides for changing American culture to be more receptive to national service by stimulating service learning in middle and high schools and by offering a $4,000 tax credit to college students willing to contribute 100 hours of public service a year.

Obama has made several speeches, including his December 5, 2007 speech, “A Call to Serve” at Cornell College in which he laid out the national service platform for his campaign and his May 25, 2008 commencement address at Wesleyan University, which outlines the vision he has for youth service in the context of the future of the United States. In the speech at Wesleyan, he said,

“As President, I intend to grow the Foreign Service, double the Peace Corps over the next few years, and engage the young people of other nations in similar programs, so that we work side by side to take on the common challenges that confront all humanity… …You know, Ted Kennedy often tells a story about the fifth anniversary celebration of the Peace Corps. He was there, and he asked one of the young Americans why he had chosen to volunteer. And the man replied, “Because it was the first time someone asked me to do something for my country.” I don’t know how many of you have been asked that question, but after today, you have no excuses.”

This speech went beyond a simple endorsement of the AmeriCorps program—it was a call to young men and women to serve their country in any way possible. In his speech at Wesleyan, Obama made clear that his support for national service derives in part from his own experience as a community organizer on the south side of Chicago – a connection that links national service to a progressive view of national service as a vehicle for social change and justice

In a world where civic engagement has become increasingly popular and where young men and women have increasingly attempted to donate their time and skills to help create change, support for programs like the Peace Corps and AmeriCorps from the highest levels of government has never been more important.

(For more current information with regards to Presidential Candidate Obama's position, also see this speech at CU-Colorado Springs.)

1. ServeNext does not have the Presidential Pledge uploaded to their website; however, they do have the Congressional Pledge, which is the exact same pledge, only that it instead asks the congressperson to join the Congressional Caucus for National Service.