Supporting the Central Florida Coalition for the Homeless

Date: March 15, 2014

To: Dr. Wardle

From: Ellie Arnold, Laura Giunta, Caitlin Hoehn

 

What’s the Problem?

Homelessness in Central Florida.

 

What’s Your Overall Strategy for Addressing It?

We are going to raise awareness of the problem and aim to change perception of homelessness through emotional appeals. We will also link our campaign with Danielle Saff’s to ultimately gain signatures for the Homeless Bill of Rights.

 

Who Are The Audiences/Stakeholders You Want to Address With Your Strategy?

We are addressing the students at the University of Central Florida. We intend to inform, raise awareness, and change opinion of homelessness in Orange County by targeting UCF students. As stated in the Explore Beautiful Trouble website “We increase our chances of victory when our actions target the person or entity with the institutional power to meet our demands.” We have focused on specifically targeting UCF students. We seek to target this audience in order to convince and persuade them to sign the Homeless Bill of Rights. Hopefully, this leverage will influence government officials that are capable of implementing policy change state wide to consider ameliorating the lives of the homeless.

 

What are the Specific Tactics You’ll Use to Achieve the Strategy?

There are several tactics and specific actions that we will employ to support and aid in achieving our overall goal. We will begin by taking pictures and interviewing several homeless people in Orange County. Before we are able to do this we are going to write a consent form (done by March 18, 2013) for the homeless to sign. This consent form will contain how we will use the information they have provided as well as where it can be found. In order to complete the consent form we will have created a website (done by March 17, 2013). Next we will post the images and interviews to the website (“The Faces of Homelessness”) and promote the website through social media platforms, Greek life, clubs that we are members of, and hopefully local newspapers.

 

Why Do You Think These Will Be Effective? Where are the Weaknesses in this Approach?

It will be difficult gaining sufficient trust among the homeless to be able to take their pictures and learn their story. Additionally, apathy amongst college students is an obstacle we will have to overcome. Finally, in due course, persuading students to sign the Bill may prove to be difficult. However, once we have taken the photos and interviews we believe that our networking skills through, primarily Greek life, will be extremely effective in generating traffic to our site. Furthermore, powerful emotional appeals through the use of a visual medium will aid us in changing the perception of the homeless. These photos will be combined with general homelessness statistics and a few stories/interviews of homeless people. 

Homelessness in Central Florida

According to the Council on Homelessness 2013 Report, these are some valuable statistics to consider when beginning my civic engagement campaign. I have decided to focus on Orange County, Florida. I am going to start with identifying who is counted as homeless?

(1) Those living in a publicly or privately operated shelter providing temporary living arrangements;

(2) Those persons whose primary night time residence is a public or private place not intended to be used as an accommodation for human beings, such as: a car, park, abandoned building or camping ground;

(3) A person who is exiting from an institution, where he or she lived for 90 days or less, and who was otherwise homeless immediately prior to entering that institution;

(4) A person who is fleeing from a domestic violence situation;

(5) Apersonwhowilllosetheirprimarynighttimeresidencewithin14days, where no subsequent dwelling has been found and the individual lacks the resources to obtain permanent housing.

Who is not counted as homeless?

• Persons residing in permanent supportive housing programs, such as rental assistance vouchers;
• Persons living in emergency shelters and temporary housing that is not dedicated to serving the homeless, such as alcohol detox centers;
• Individuals and families temporarily staying with family or friends due to the loss of their own housing or economic reasons (doubled up or sofa surfing).
• Persons living in permanent housing with assistance from a government program.

Factors Cited as Contributing to a Decreased Number of Homeless

• Successful programs implemented in the county over past two years;
• Stricter enforcement of trespass ordinances made the street homeless less visible, and harder to find and count;
• Changes in the method used for the count contributed to a lower count, and more reliable count numbers;
• Adjusting count results to ensure that only those who are literally homeless are reported, resulting in decreases particularly by eliminating school age children and other homeless who are in jail.
• Fewer emergency shelters that serve and target the homeless were identified in 2013 than prior years;
• The lack of service providers in rural counties made it harder to identify the homeless, and where to find them during the count;
• Change in federal count instructions that limited shelter counts to only those facilities identified in the planning area’s homeless housing inventory;
• Large emergency shelter provider in area did not report their homeless service data for night of the count;
• The continuum of care had fewer dollars, and volunteers available to carry out their street count;
• 2013 count was not able to get out into the woods, compared to the past street count; •        More permanent supportive housing beds available in 2013 to serve the homeless, whereby those housed are no longer counted as homeless;

• Good, warm and dry weather on day of count kept the street homeless out of cold night shelters, and made them harder to find.

Factors Cited as Contributing to Increased Count

• Better planning for the street count to identify encampments, and recruitment of more volunteers;
• Large increase in homeless families found;
• More transient homeless were found during the count as result of having homeless persons help do the street count;

• Shelter count up due to more beds available that serve homeless veterans;
• Better count system used in 2013, including more homeless persons involved in the street count effort.

Efforts to improve data quality, including developing consistent and better methodologies for conducting the point in time counts of the homeless, are needed, and are being called for by national homeless advocacy groups. Until those changes are made, the early caution is repeated – year-to-year comparisons at the community level can be misleading. Too many variables can cause widely different results.

Now that I have collected these facts and statistics, I can start to look at ways that people in Central Florida have been trying to reduce homelessness. I can then look at why these people were or weren’t able to help and I can decide what to do in the future from there. 

My Civic Engagement

Now that I’ve analyzed civic engagement in my own community, I’m getting involved. As interested as I was in growing a front yard garden, unfortunately, I don’t have a front yard. Luckily, the Helvenstons are legally allowed to grow their own food so they don’t need my help anyway. I’ve learned all about the different persuasive tactics to utilize in a rhetorical case and I’m ready to engage in my own.

After some research on local problems in the Orlando area, one that I found most prevalent was homelessness. In November, I participated in Winter Park’s Feed the Need Campaign. While interning at the Winter Park Chamber of Commerce, I was on the Feed the Need committee and I helped with the planning and execution for this campaign. The Winter Park Chamber of Commerce joined the city of Winter Park and Rollins College in launching this philanthropic effort to end hunger in Central Florida. Starting on October 31, the campaign continued for a month, raising money for Second Harvest Food Bank, the nonprofit agency based in Orlando that strives to provide meals to needy families. At the end of the month, the President of the Chamber of Commerce announced that the Feed the Need campaign exceeded its initial expectations and raised more than $90,000 for Second Harvest.

As empowering as this campaign was, poverty is still a huge issue in Central Florida. According to the Florida Spotlight on Poverty, there are over 56,687 homeless people in the state of Florida. Out of our entire population in Florida, 25% children, 14% seniors, 18% women and 35% single-parent families were considered below the poverty line in 2013. We need to help the people who we share this community with. This is their city too and there are steps to take to help these people get back on their feet. I plan to continue to educate myself on ways I can get involved with the homeless population in Central Florida. I want to help in whatever way I can and I plan to do that this semester.

Rhetorical Case Analysis

In order to analyze a rhetorical case, I have put together a final list of questions associated with rhetorical theory. I’ve also included brief definitions for the term mentioned in each question. 

Rhetor: “any person or institution who uses symbolic action.” (p. 10) “Who are the rhetors?”

Persona as Performance: “the character, role, identity, authority and image a rhetor constructs and performs during a rhetorical act.” (p.150) “What persona did the rhetors use to deliver the message?” 

Character: “in the character of the speaker; more completely, it is the character of a rhetor performed in the rhetorical act and known by the audience because of prior interactions.” (p. 152) “How did the rhetors establish credibility?” 

Roles: “ability to incorporate and exemplify the officially accredited values of the society.” (p. 155) “How did the rhetors use social roles to relate to the audience?” 

Identity: “the physical and/or behavioral attributes that make a person recognizable as a member of a group.” (p. 158) “Who did the rhetors chose to identify with?”

Authority: “a rhetor’s possession of socially recognized power.” (p. 161) “How did the rhetors establish authority?” 

Image: “a verbal and visual representation, emphasizing particular qualities and characteristics, that creates a perception of the rhetor in the audience’s minds.” (p. 167) “How did the rhetor create a positive image?” 

Audience: “any person who hears, reads, or sees a symbolic action, the group targeted by the message, even if it is not present, or the group capable of acting in response to the message.” (p. 179) “Who is the audience?”  

Appeal to the Audience: “factors guide audiences’ assessments of symbolic action, sometimes justifiably and sometimes in the form of unwarranted bias.” (p. 181) “How did the rhetor appeal to the audience?”

Values: “organizing principles and orientations that people use to interpret a world around them, including symbolic actions.” (p.185) Beliefs: “set knowledge that are grounded into a person’s value orientation.” (p. 185) Attitudes: “positive or negative feelings toward some person, thing, or idea.” (p. 185) “Did the rhetor appeal to the values, beliefs and attitudes of the audience?” 

Ethos: “that which is in character of the speaker.” (p. 12) “How did the rhetor establish credibility?” 

Pathos: “that which leads the audience to feel emotion.” (p. 12) “How did the rhetors appeal to the audience emotionally?” “What response did the audience have to the rhetor’s emotional appeal?” 

Logos: “that which relies on argument itself, by showing or seeming to show something.” (p. 12) “How did the rhetor’s argument appeal to the audience logically?” 

Rhetorical Situation: “a complex of persons, events, objects, and relations presenting an actual or potential exigence which can be completely or partially removed if discourse, introduced into the situation, can so constrain human decision or action as to bring about the significant modification of the exigence.” (p. 203) “What is the rhetorical situation?”

Exigence: “an imperfection marked by urgency; it is a defect, an obstacle, something waiting to be done, a thing which is other than it should be.” (p. 203) “What is the exigence?”

Genre: “a rhetorical form created by the recurrent elements of the rhetorical situation, which creates clusters of discourse that share style, substance, and purpose.” (p. 210) “What is the genre?”

Constraints: “persons, events, objects, and relations which are part of the situation because they have the power to constrain decision and action needed to modify the exigence.” (p. 206) “What are the constraints?” “What are the constraints of the rhetor?” “What are the constraints of the audience?” “What are the constraints of the situation?” “What are the constraints of the genre?”

I think that after all of these questions have been answered, the only question left to ask is, “What persuasive strategies were successful?”

Audiences

In my last post, I defined “rhetors” and as promised, I will now dig deeper into the definition of “audiences.” I mentioned before that when analyzing a rhetorical case, it is important to consider several questions. Just as I did for my post about rhetors, I will go back to the definitions and focus on the ideas associated with audiences. I will then begin to answer these questions as they relate to the Helvenston’s campaign for front yard gardens.

As defined in the text, an “audience” is “any person who hears, reads, or sees a symbolic action, the group targeted by the message, even if it is not present, or the group capable of acting in response to the message.” (p. 179) In a rhetorical analysis, the rhetor and the audience are the most important. The audience is the group of people capable of responding to the persuasion of the rhetor. The only question to ask is, “Who is the audience?” As applied to the Helvenston’s campaign, there are many audiences to be analyze but the most important would be the City of Orlando. 

Now that we know who the audience is, we have to consider how to appeal to the audience. Did they appeal using identification or maybe by relating to the values, beliefs and attitudes of the audience? 

In this case I think it is important to ask the questions related to “values, beliefs and attitudes.” As stated in the text, “values” are “organizing principles and orientations that people use to interpret a world around them, including symbolic actions.” (p.185) When defining “beliefs” in the text, it is stated that beliefs are “set knowledge that are grounded into a person’s value orientation.” (p. 185) And “attitudes” are described as, “positive or negative feelings toward some person, thing, or idea.” (p. 185) So we have to ask, “Did the rhetor appeal to the values, beliefs and attitudes of the audience?” This is important to consider with the City of Orlando because the Helvenstons had to keep the values of the city in mind. 

It is also important to decide if the rhetor appealed to the audience using “ethos, logos or pathos”. After reading through Aristotle’s interpretation of rhetoric, I think that defining ethos, pathos and logos is very important. Aristotle defined rhetoric as, “an ability in each particular case, to see the available means of persuasion.” (p. 12) Persuasion plays a large role in Aristotle’s definition and it is important to identify the three types of persuasion. First is “ethos,” “that which is in character of the speaker.” (p. 12) Ethos basically asks, “How did the rhetor establish credibility?” Next is “pathos,” “that which leads the audience to feel emotion.” (p. 12) Pathos asks, “How did the rhetors appeal to the audience emotionally?” In the case of the Helvenstons, it is also important to ask, “What response did the audience have to the rhetor’s emotional appeal?” “Logos” is, “that which relies on argument itself, by showing or seeming to show something.” (p. 12) Logos asks, “How did the rhetor’s argument appeal to the audience logically?” 

According to Aristotle’s theory on rhetoric, we must first distinguish between non-artistic and artistic proofs. This asks if the campaign is appealing to physical evidence or to ethos, pathos and logos. Then it has to be determined what kind of appeal, ethos, pathos or logos, is used and depending on the type of topic being discussed, any of these appeals might be helpful. 

Now that I have added to the list of questions relating to rhetors and audiences, I think that I have a stronger grip on how to approach this Rhetorical Case Analysis. In my next post, I will focus on rhetorical situation and how it relates to the Helvenstons campaign.

Rhetors

In my last post, I began to define and analyze the rhetors and audiences in the Helvenston’s campaign for front yard gardens. I mentioned that when analyzing a rhetorical case, it is important to consider several questions. In order for me to create these questions, I am going to go back to the definitions and focus on the ideas associated with rhetors. In this post, I will focus only on defining the rhetors in this case and analyzing many definitions that are associated with types of rhetors.

I am going to begin by simply defining rhetor as stated in the book, “any person or institution who uses symbolic action.” (p. 10) This leads me to the first question, “Who are the rhetors?” In this campaign, the answer is simple, the Helvenstons are the rhetors. 

Now that I’ve defined who the rhetor in this case is, it is important to analyze the rhetorical “persona as performance,” which as stated in the book is, “the character, role, identity, authority and image a rhetor constructs and performs during a rhetorical act.” (p.150) This basically refers to the way the rhetor behaves anytime they are delivering a message or engaging in rhetoric. It is important to understand that the rhetor takes on a particular persona and that we all have multiple identities. Now it makes sense to ask, “What persona did the rhetors use to deliver the message?” This can be answered by analyzing how the Helvenstons chose to be viewed by their audience. They chose to be practical and not persuasive, but instead, informative. They did not for anyone to pay attention to them, they just shared their story. 

With the “persona as performance” defined, next comes the “character.” As defined in the book, “character” refers to ethos, which is “in the character of the speaker; more completely, it is the character of a rhetor performed in the rhetorical act and known by the audience because of prior interactions.” (p. 152) This helped me to form the next question, “How did the rhetors establish credibility?” In the case of the Helvenstons, I think the best way to begin to answer this question would be to talk about practical wisdom, virtue and good will. They used these three values to remind their audience of the type of people they are. The Helvenstons used practical wisdom, which is “the use of common sense and sound reason,” (p. 153) to persuade their audience. They also used virtue, “sharing the values the audience considers worthy of merit.” (p. 153) Lastly, they used good will, “the quality of being motivated by the audience’s best interests, as putting the needs of the audience ahead of the rhetor’s own interests and motives.” (p. 154) These three values established credibility for the Helvenstons.

Next, I would like to analyze the “social roles,” or the ability to “incorporate and exemplify the officially accredited values of the society.” (p. 155) This basically refers to relating socially to the audience. Now I ask, “How did the rhetors use social roles to relate to the audience?” After reading more about the Helvenstons and listening to them speak to our class, I was persuaded by the health benefits and financial benefits that were mentioned. I did not feel like they were pushing their beliefs on me but instead, they were simply sharing why they chose to garden and their initial reasons were very relatable. I think that all Americans can relate to wanting to be more healthy and financially stable. 

“Identity,” as defined in the book is “the physical and/or behavioral attributes that make a person recognizable as a member of a group.” (p. 158) This refers to who the rhetor decides to associate with. It is important to associate with groups who already have established identities in order to establish your own identity. This brings me to question, “Who did the rhetors chose to identify with?” I remember thinking that it was very interesting for the Helvenstons to identify with the Institute for Justice. IJ’s National Food Freedom Initiative is a nationwide campaign that will bring property rights, economic liberty and free speech challenges to laws that interfere with the ability of Americans to produce, market, procure, and consume the foods of their choice.  IJ has filed three cases to inaugurate the initiative. Through these and future cases, IJ’s National Food Freedom Initiative will end unreasonable and intrusive governmental interference with our food choices and usher in real food freedom for all Americans. I think that by associating themselves with the Institute for Justice, they wanted to be seen as fighting for justice rather than fighting against the City of Orlando.

As defined in the book, “authority” is “a rhetor’s possession of socially recognized power.” (p. 161) This refers to the rhetor’s ability to establish authority. “How did the rhetors establish authority?” I think the Helvenstons established authority by doing their own research and creating success with their own garden. They showed their audience that the success of their garden was self made.

“Image,” is defined in the book as “a verbal and visual representation, emphasizing particular qualities and characteristics, that creates a perception of the rhetor in the audience’s minds.” (p. 167) This leads me to ask the question, “How did the rhetor create a positive image?” I think that by continuing to fight for justice and fighting against the City, the Helvenstons maintained a positive image for themselves. 

I plan to analyze the “audience” in my next post. These answers to the questions are vague for now but I plan to elaborate as I continue to work toward my Rhetorical Case Analysis.

Rhetors and Audiences

When analyzing a rhetorical case, it is important to consider several questions. I have chosen to analyze the battle for front yard gardens in Orlando. Last week, Jason and Jennifer Helvenston visited my Rhetoric and Civic Engagement class. The Helvenstons told our class their story about how they campaigned for the freedom to legally grow their own food in their front yard. 

According to Chapter 1 in our text, “rhetoric” is described as, “the use of symbolic action by human beings to share ideas, enabling them to work together to make decisions about matters of common concern and to construct social reality. Rhetoric is the means by which people make meaning of and affect the world in which they live” (page 5). In defining rhetoric, I found that the Helvenstons shared their ideas with their community on how people should be able to grow gardens in their front yard effectively. 

I will be constructing a rhetorical analysis of this civic engagement case. In order to do that, there are many questions I need to answer. 

• What is the cause for the campaign?
• How did the author establish credibility?
• What is the reason for an argument?
• Who is the intended audience?
• Why does the audience disagree?
• What type of organizational structure is used?
• What evidence is used to support the argument?
• Are pathos/ethos/logos employed?
• How are the ideas arranged?
• What rhetorical methods are employed?
• Is there repetition for emphasis?
• What kind of dialogue/narration is used?
• What kind of imagery is used? 
• What kind of civic engagement does this case demonstrate (according to Ekman and Amna)?

When analyzing this case, it is most important to begin with answering the question of who the “rhetors” are and who the “audience” is. The “rhetors” are the orators, in this case, the Halvestons. The audience, or the listener who can implement the change, is the City of Orlando. I think it is also important to analyze the symbols used in this case. In Chapter 1, “symbols” are defined as, “an arbitrary representation of something else, a word, or an image that represents a thing, thought, or action,” (page 5). For the Helvenstons their symbol was the word they used to describe their gardens. They chose to call their front yard garden a “Patriot Garden.” By using this word as their symbol, the Helvenstons encouraged people to think about the fact that by fighting for the freedom of these front yard gardens, this makes them patriotic. By associating the word “patriotic” with these gardens, the Helvenstons created a connection for their community to understand that their rights were being compromised and action needed to be taken.The Helvenstons helped their community to recognize that they could be a part of making a difference by growing their own food and taking pride in what they are eating. 

In my next few posts, I will continue to answer the questions above, eventually I will construct a rhetorical analysis of the Helvenstons’ campaign. 

Below is a link to the Helvenstons’ website:

http://patriot-gardens.com/

Rhetoric

According to “Rhetoric in Civic Life,” all humans assign meaning to different things in this world through the use of symbols. Being able to communicate with the use of symbolic action is the act of rhetoric. Rhetoric is defined as “the use of symbolic action by human beings to share ideas, enabling them to work together to make decisions about matters of common concern and to construct social reality.” Essentially, rhetoric can be easily defined as an efficient way to speak and write.

Rhetoric is a symbolic action and symbols can be both verbal and visual. It can usually be a mixture of the two combined. A symbol is an arbitrary representation of something else, a word or an image that represents a thing, thought or action. A symbolic action, which is an expressive human action, the rhetorical mobilization of symbols to act in the world, meaning that rhetoric is more than just persuasion. Instead, rhetoric encourages us to think about things like our previous life experiences and sensations that provide the basis for our specific perceptions of these symbols. Rhetoric generates common issues and concerns among each other allowing them to work together.

According to Burke’s declaration regarding identification, rhetoric is not efficient without the element of common identification. Burke says, “in forming ideas of our personal identity, we spontaneously identify ourselves with family, nation, political or cultural cause, church and so on.” This leads to rhetoric agency, which is the “capacity to act, to have the competence to speak or write in a way that will be recognized or heeded by others in one’s community.” Without the element of common identification, rhetoric cannot be nearly as effective. Since rhetoric plays an important role in democratic societies, the ability to persuade and identify with groups of people lead to activism in political, economic and social situations. This is how rhetoric is related to civic engagement.

As with everything I discuss here, I have found a correlation between rhetoric and social media. I believe that rhetoric relates to civic engagement and therefore, to social media. Rhetoric is affiliated with communal activity, creating a bridge to civic engagement. Both rhetoric and civic engagement are partially dependent on norms and perceptions. The social connection between rhetoric and civic engagement is that people use their connections to engage themselves civically. This power in spreading knowledge happens on social media every single day. Rhetoric can be used to engage citizens and social media has the ability to expand that audience of citizens. 

Civic Engagement Collage

 

 

 

I think that civic engagement is the act of seeking knowledge and using information to improve either a local community, state or nation, doing anything from latent civil participation to manifest, formal political participation. I have decided that I think political awareness is a kind of social awareness, as is social media. My generation might not meet face-to-face to discuss politics anymore but in my collage, I have included some examples of how forums to discuss current political issues do exist through social media. My generation participates most in this form of latent civil participation. We may not be holding forums and discussing politics face-to-face, but we do improve the smaller and more attainable issues in our local communities. We do know about political issues usually because of Twitter. I chose to include clippings from Twitter, Facebook and Pinterest where discussions about current political issues are posted. My generation uses Twitter and Facebook to share links to articles and Pinterest to post memes and graphics with quotes about their opinions on different issues. Although this is strange to the generations that came before us, this is our way of understanding the world around us. We are able to participate in “online forums” and communicate with other peers and experts simply by “tweeting” back to someone else’s tweet about an issue and their opinion.

More on Civic Engagement

After reading the Florida Civic Health Index, I’ve learned to understand a new perspective on the definition of civic engagement. According to the statistics on Millenials in Florida, there is a depressing distinction of being the most disengaged group in one of the most civically disengaged states in the nation. Florida has consistently ranked near the bottom among the 50 states. But even this somewhat discouraging news that nearly half of the population of Millenials do register to vote is diminished by the fact that only one in five actually did vote in the 2010 midterm election.

There are many reasons provided by the Florida Civic Health Index that show what factors promote civic engagement and where the Millenials and Florida are lacking. I think that of the four characteristics discussed, education, race/ethnicity, family income and gender; education is the most important. According to the statistics provided, there is a strong correlation between educational attainment and civic participation. I think the most interesting finding was the effect of education on group participation and volunteering. For these indicators, I was most surprised to find that it was the Millenials currently enrolled in high school who were the most engaged, although, this might be a reflection of high school courses and scholarship requirements.

What I found to be most interesting was the correlation between social networks and civic engagement. As it might be expected, Millenials were most likely to communicate with friends and family online, and this percentage declines as age increases. Like I mentioned in my last blog post, face-to-face interactions are not as likely with this generation but I don’t believe that this means we aren’t civically engaged. Although the frequent Internet use boosted registration for voting, it did not have the same effect on turnout.

I do agree with the idea mentioned in the Florida Civic Health Index that there is potential for online social connections to increase levels of civic engagement, particularly with Millenials as the generation most likely to be frequently connecting online. But unfortunately, this finding relies on education, given that the increasing levels of education, along with income, are related to Internet access.

After reading the Florida Civic Health Index, I am motivated to follow the recommendations and continue to promote civic engagement in my generation. The recommendations include:

1. Creating more opportunities to get youth involved in local government.
2. Strengthening civic education in all of Florida’s Colleges and Universities and expanding programs that give students the experience and know-how to organize, to debate, and to engage with public issues.
3. Providing opportunities for non-college bound youth by expanding service learning and other experimental civic education programs in Title 1 high schools and by supporting programs that offer community based opportunities for civic engagement.
4. Creating a statewide plan to reduce Florida’s high school dropout rate and increase the number of students who don’t go to college.

After reading Ekman and Amna’s study, Keith and Cossart and now the Florida Civic Health Index, I believe I now understand what civic engagement means to me. I think that civic engagement is the act of seeking knowledge and using information to improve either a local community, state or nation, doing anything from latent civil participation to manifest, formal political participation. I have decided that I think political awareness is a kind of social awareness, as is social media. My generation participates most in this form of latent civil participation. We may not be holding forums and discussing politics face-to-face, but we do improve the smaller and more attainable issues in our local communities. We do know about political issues usually because of Twitter. Although this is strange to the generations that came before us, this is our way of understanding the world around us. We are able to participate in “online forums” and communicate with other peers and experts simply by “tweeting” back to someone else’s tweet about an issue and their opinion.

I have found social media and local volunteering to be my way of becoming civically engaged. I do think that knowing more about politics and participating more in elections would be beneficial but I like the fact that I am able to help local foundations. I like seeing that I am making a difference in the people who live in my immediate community. I think that if I’m going to start somewhere, I should start here and move up to the bigger issues later. Learning that I can make such a large impact on a small foundation shows me what I am capable of and has given me the confidence to go on and make differences in bigger foundations. I am very satisfied with the way my view on civic engagement has been shaped. I have learned where I am already engaged and where I am able to improve. Eventually, I do think that this form of latent civic participation will be recognized.