Castaner1

Katherine Castaner
Professor Jacob Stewart
ENC 3331
8 September 2015
Defining Civic Engagement
The definition of civic engagement is one that has been discussed, disputed, and
deliberated by many. Admittedly, my first thought was to wonder why a set definition
even needed to exist. I wondered why we, as a society, couldnt leave civic engagement
open to interpretation and allow citizens to define their own level of engagement. In
retrospect, I realize this was and an idealistic and slightly unreasonable point of view.
Through reading and discussion, Ive come to realize that the definition of civic
engagement is more than a point of debate; it shapes how we view the need for civic
engagement and thus how engaged we actually are. Once I realized the need for a set
definition of civic engagement, I began to formulate my own definition: Civic
engagement can be defined as an attempt at inciting change in a community or interacting
with others to better understand the change he or she is working to incite.
My definition of civic engagement is similar to Ekman and Amns view in that
both would encompass what Ekman and Amn refer to as manifest and latent forms
of political participation. Ekman and Amn refer to actions that are not political but may
become political as latent forms of participation (287). However, I chose not to include
these words in my definition because the distinction seems to suggest that the aim of
civic engagement should either be its connection to politics or its potential to become
connected to politics. While politics (in the traditional sense) is a legitimate vehicle for

Castaner2
change, I chose to focus my definition on change in a community rather than a
particular method for that change. I found Ekman and Amns distinction troubling
because it left no place for civic engagement that had no potential to become political.
For example, I have donated blood on multiple occasions and worked with OneBlood (a
south Florida based blood bank) to organize high school blood drives. Both donating
blood and organizing blood drives involves interacting with members in a community
and impacting the lives of others to create a change. While this is a clear case of civic
engagement, Ekman and Amns definition does not create a place for it. My definition is
broad enough to encompass examples of civic engagement that are not considered
traditionally political or pre-political.
In addition to encompassing multiple methods of engagement, my proposed
definition leaves a place for both an active and passive participant in civic engagement.1
Case in point: while most people would likely agree that utilizing UCFs Free Speech
Zones to educate fellow students on veganism qualifies as an example of civic
engagement, they may not consider stopping to listen to that student as an instance of
civic engagement. It fairly simple to see the first student (the speaker/educator) as
civically engaged; he or she is aiming to make a change in the UCF community and is
seeking out direct contact with other students in order to do so. However, under my
definition the second student (the one that purposely stops to listen to the speaker) is also
civically engaged. I find this inclusion necessary because in order to make a change in his
or her community, the first student (the speaker) needs to connect with and impact other
1 The words active and passive are not meant to suggest that active
civic engagement is more significant than passive civic engagement.
An active participant is simply one that attempts to incite change,
while a passive participant is one that seeks to understand that change
and possibly assist.

Castaner3
students, which makes the other students paramount. To clarify, this would not include a
student that walks by the free speech zone and inadvertently overhears the first student
speak on veganism. In order to qualify as civically engaged under my definition, the
student would need to actively choose to listen to the speaker. This distinction prevents
from categorizing an insignificant encounter as civic engagement. In order to highlight
this distinction, I chose the words interacting and to better understand for the second
half of my definition of civic engagement. The word interacting suggests an extended
exchange (rather than a quick glance at the free speech zone, for example), and the words
to better understand indicate that there must be intent to gather information on the
initiative for change (rather than overhearing a student speak).
The inclusion of an active and passive participant stems from Keith and Cossarts
discussion of forums. Keith and Cossart draw attention to forums in the United States and
France between 1870 and 1940. These forums would neatly fall under my proposed
definition of civic engagement because there would be both an active participant who
brings up a point of concern and multiple passive participants who would debate on this
concern and may later chose to mend the concern or issue. Keith and Cossarts discussion
also accentuates another significant feature of my definition: my definition only suggests
that a passive participant work to understand an active participants position- not that
he or she agree with it. Keith and Cossart point out the fundamental tension (46) found
in forums. In a forum, a participant may not agree with the concern at hand but by
participating in the forum, he or she is civically engaging (regardless of whether or not he
or she will support that change). Similarly, a student would not need to agree with a
speaker in a UCF Free Speech Zone in order to interact with that speaker and better

Castaner4
understand the issue the speaker is working to change. I specifically created a definition
that would not suggest that a passive participant would need to agree with an active one
because it would have eliminated the possibility for debate and tension- key elements of
change and thus, civic engagement.
The final element that makes my definition of civic engagement functional is its
emphasis on change in a community. Keith and Cossart specifically exclude activities
that entail merely talking about politics (46). While I avoid the word politics in my
definition, I agree that civic engagement must be limited to activities that have a goal of
change involved. However, I leave the definition of change partially ambiguous because
change can occur on a variety of scales. For example, ThinkProgress recently reported
that thousands of doctors fear mass deportation of illegal immigrants would lead to a
health crisis and have decided to protest Donald Trumps calls for deportation. These
protests would be an example of doctors trying to incite change because they have made
their opinions available to others and anticipate that it will change opinions or influence
actual policy. However, if two doctors (with the same opinion on the matter) were to
merely discuss the matter this would not be an example of civic engagement because
there would be no possibility for change within that exchange. I also was careful to
include the words in a community in order to include change on different scales. In the
case of these doctors protesting, they are working to reach a variety of communities:
voting Americans, other doctors, and policy makers. However, under my definition, their
civic engagement would be just as legitimate if it came in the form of speaking at medical
conferences because although they would be reaching far fewer people, they would still
be working to influence the medical community. This is part of the reason that I find the

Castaner5
fact that the 2011 Florida Civic Health Index reported only 18% of Florida Millennials
had participation in any group so alarming. Group participation (in clubs, sports leagues,
or any other type of program) allow people to reach different networks or communities.
Without these ties, Florida Millennials will have a much harder time becoming civically
engaged under my definition.
While there may be some concerns with my definition, I will now work to resolve
any areas that may appear problematic at first glance. Some may be concerned with the
fact that I purposefully avoid the word political in my definition of civic engagement.
To clarify, I have no issues with political form of involvement. It is a legitimate form of
civic engagement and is definitely an effective mode for change. However, I also believe
that the word politics holds many pre conceived notions and that including it in my
definition would likely turn many people away from the concept of civic engagement. In
Citizen Education as a Craft, Not a Program, Boyte presents a new view of a different
kind of politics, a public work politics of everyday public problem solving (81).
While this definition of politics is much more accessible and would easily fit into my
definition of civic engagement, I know that this is not the definition of politics that most
people have come to know. Therefore, including the word politics in my definition
would render my definition less functional and accessible. I will also address a concern
that Ekman and Amn had with many other definitions of civic engagement: the fear that
they are too broad. While I can understand why this is a valid concern, I believe that my
definition is both broad enough to encompass most examples of civic engagement and
also narrow enough to exclude examples of interactions that are not civic engagement. As
I previously discussed, my definition would not include discussions without the

Castaner6
possibility for change or unintentional encounters with those working to incite change. I
believe the main reason my definition may appear to be broad at first glance would be
because it is short in length (in comparison to Ekman and Amn, for example, who
construct an entire table to define civic engagement). However, I also believe that having
a succinct definition is what makes my definition so functional- it is simple to understand
and its a definition that could be called to mind easily in order to determine if something
is truly an example of civic engagement. The risk of creating a definition that was too
broad was one that was calculated in order to make a functional definition possible.
I was only able to develop my definition of civic engagement after realizing the
need for one. Civic engagement, as of now, has no set definition; if a millennial or any
other citizen wanted to know if he or she is civically engaged, there would be no standard
definition to help determine that. In order to promote civic engagement, we first need to
be able to define it. After coming to that realization, I believe I was able to make a
succinct and functional definition for civic engagement. In order to encompass different
modes for engagement, stress change in a community, and different levels of
participation, I have come to the conclusion that civic engagement can be defined as an
attempt at inciting change in a community or interacting with others to better understand
the change he or she is working to incite.

Castaner7
Works Cited
Boyte, Harry C. "Ch.5: Citizen Education as a Craft, Not a Program." Democracy's Education.
Public Work, Citizenship, and the Future of Higher Education. Nashville: Vanderbilt UP,
2014. N. pag. Print.
Cossart, Paula, and William Keith. "The Search for "Real" Democracy: Rhetorical Citizenship
and Public Deliberation in France and the United States, 1870-1940." Participations 3.2
(2012): 47-60. Web.
Ekman, Joakim, and Erik Amn. "Political Participation and Civic Engagement: Towards a
New Typology." Human Affairs 22.3 (2012): n. pag. Web.
Lee, Esther. "Thousands of Doctors Are Protesting Trumps Plan For Mass Deportation, Say It
Will Make America Sick." ThinkProgress RSS. CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS
ACTION FUND, 04 Sept. 2015. Web. 06 Sept. 2015.
"NCoC: Florida Civic Health Index 2011." NCoC: Florida Civic Health Index 2011. National
Conference of Citizenship, 17 Jan. 2012. Web. 06 Sept. 2015.