running head: SCHOOL AND ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP 1 ...

running head: SCHOOL AND ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP

1

Differential Effects of School Experiences on Active Citizenship among German and Turkish-Origin Students

Philipp Jugert* University of Leipzig

Katharina Eckstein* Peter Noack Friedrich Schiller University Jena

Word count: 3,500

This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Jugert, P., Eckstein, K., & Noack, P. (2016) Differential effects of school experiences on active citizenship among German and Turkish-origin students. International Journal of Psychology, which has been published in final form at DOI: 10.1002/ijop.12409. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving.

* Shared first authorship

Author Note Philipp Jugert, Department of Psychology, University of Leipzig. Katharina Eckstein and Peter Noack, Department of Psychology, University of Jena. The empirical research upon which this paper is based was supported by a grant from the European Commission 7th Framework Programme, FP7-SSH-2007-1, Grant Agreement No: 225282, Processes Influencing Democratic Ownership and Participation (PIDOP). It was

running head: SCHOOL AND ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP

2

awarded to the University of Surrey (UK), University of Liège (Belgium), Masaryk University (Czech Republic), University of Jena (Germany), University of Bologna (Italy), University of Porto (Portugal), Örebro University (Sweden), Ankara University (Turkey), and Queen’s University Belfast (UK). Author contribution: P.J., K.E., and P.N. conceived of the study. P.J. and P.N. participated in the design and data collection. P.J. and K.E. conducted the analyses for the study and drafted parts of the manuscript. All authors participated in the interpretation of the data, read, edited, and approved the final manuscript. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Philipp Jugert, Department of Psychology, University of Leipzig, Neumarkt 9-19, 04109 Leipzig, Germany. E-mail: [email protected].

SCHOOL AND ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP

2 Abstract

While research suggests that schools can foster active citizenship among youth, studies have not tested whether ethnic minority youth may benefit differently from school experiences than ethnic majority youth. In this study of 219 students (138 German majority and 81 Turkishorigin minority; Mage = 18.26; 55% female), we examined the association between different experiences at school and four indicators of youth active citizenship, controlling for various socio-demographic characteristics. Whereas value of social studies was associated with three out of four active citizenship indicators among both ethnic groups, the effects of the other school-related variables on active citizenship were moderated by ethnicity. Specifically, indicators of classroom climate, such as open classroom climate and classroom community, were only associated with greater active citizenship among Turkish-minority youth, while participatory factors, such as engagement in school decisions, were only associated with active citizenship among native German youth. Keywords: Civic engagement, active citizenship, ethnic groups, school experiences


3

Differential Effects of School Experiences on Active Citizenship among German and Turkish-Origin Students Young people’s involvement in civic life is an important pillar of democratic societies, not only for native youth, but also for young immigrants, for whom such involvement also mirrors successful integration into the host society (OECD, 2012). Processes linked to youth civic development are closely tied to experiences in daily life settings, among which schools play a particularly important role (Hahn, 2006). And yet, to date, the question of to what extent the impact of school experiences varies by ethnic background remains largely unanswered. It is therefore the goal of this study to examine whether school experiences affect ethnic majority and minority youth in Germany differently. The ways in which young people encounter politics constitutes an integral part of the concept of active citizenship. Active citizenship generally refers to people’s readiness to contribute to the common good (Sherrod, Flanagan, & Youniss, 2002). According to Zaff, Boyd, Li, Lerner, and Lerner (2010) active citizenship includes not only overt behaviors, but also cognitive and socio-emotional processes. It encompasses a sense of civic duty and efficacy, connectedness to the community, and engagement in civic life. Adolescence and young adulthood are considered to be formative periods in life for the development of active citizenship, given the significant increases in socio-political awareness and reasoning (cf. impressionable years hypothesis; Sears & Levy, 2003). Correspondingly, taking on civic and societal responsibility is viewed as one developmental task of this period in life (Sherrod et al., 2002). However, the meaning and correlates of active citizenship may differ for ethnic majority and minority youth. Research suggests, for example, that the latter group shows high levels of involvement in the context of social networks associated with their own community (Mansouri & Kirpitchenko, 2015). We make use of the active citizenship framework in the current study by focusing not only on overt behaviors (i.e., civic engagement), but also on


4

young people’s civic awareness and capacity (i.e., collective efficacy, political attentiveness, political trust). Across various countries, schools share the common goal to promote civic competencies among students. According to Scheerens (2011), this can be accomplished in two ways – through informal learning and explicit teaching. The former can be further distinguished into factors related to classroom climate (e.g., open classroom climate for discussion) and into structures for student involvement (e.g., opportunities to engage in school activities). Research shows that a discussion-oriented, supportive, and participatory school environment relates to a wide variety of civic outcomes and therewith to diverse components of active citizenship (Eckstein & Noack, 2016; Flanagan, Cumsille, Gill, & Gallay, 2007; Torney-Purta, Lehmann, Oswald, & Schulz, 2001).1 Explicit teaching of civic contents, in turn, primarily takes place in social studies lessons. In order to explain the outcomes of social studies lessons, expectancy-value theory (e.g., Wigfield & Eccles, 2000) provides a valuable framework. Against this backdrop, Liem and Chua (2013) showed that the value students place on social studies, rather than ability beliefs, predicted various civic orientations. Given these considerations, we focused on three school-related experiences in the current study (1) classroom climate (i.e., community in class, open classroom climate for discussion), (2) participatory structures (i.e., possibilities to participate in school decisions), and (3) value of social studies. It is currently unknown whether school experiences affect all students equally. In Germany 29 percent of young people between the age of 5 and 25 have an ethnic minority background (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2015), with Turkish-origin youth constituting the biggest group. Like many minorities, Turkish immigrants in Germany are a marginalized group that often feels less integrated into the host society (Soltani, 2001). Research indicates that, in order to compensate for this lack of integration on the larger social level, personal


5

social bonds are of particular significance. Thus, social factors, such as the wish to meet other like-minded peers, the integration in social networks, and perceived social norms are more strongly associated with ethic minority than with majority youth’s civic involvement (Jugert, Eckstein, Noack, Kuhn, & Benbow, 2013). Applied to the school context, this might suggest that social factors are of higher importance to immigrant youth than to their native peers as well. While the few studies that compared the effects of school experiences on civic outcomes by ethnic background revealed few differential effects (cf. Flanagan et al., 2007; Godfrey & Grayman, 2014)2, they relied on very specific school characteristics and civic outcomes and were based on US American samples only. Current Study By focusing on a multi-faceted and theory-based set of indicators, this study aims to shed more light on ethnic background as a moderator between school experiences and youth active citizenship. Our assumptions are structured according to the three examined schoolrelated experiences: Concerning classroom climate (i.e., classroom community, open classroom climate for discussion), we assumed that if there were any differences by ethnic background, relationships with active citizenship should be stronger among Turkish minority than among German majority youth. Our rationale is that classroom climate reflects social connectedness, a sense of belonging, social support, and encouragement – all factors that have been shown to be particularly important for active citizenship among ethnic minority youth. As to participatory structures in school we took an exploratory approach. On the one hand, participatory structures can provide opportunities to establish social bonds and might therefore be of higher importance among Turkish immigrant youth. On the other hand, participatory structures may relate to formal ways of engagement. In the conceptual framework of Scheerens (2011), this dimension also involves school councils and


6

parliaments. Qualitative work shows that these formal ways of engagement are a less prominent correlate of active citizenship among ethnic minority than among majority youth (Mansouri & Kirpitchenko, 2015). Finally, according to expectancy-value theory (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000), value beliefs are formed by youth’s social and cultural milieu, the beliefs of socializing agents, and previous achievement-related experiences. Once students place a high value on a domain, they are more likely to perform well within its boundaries. Consequently, we did not expect the relationship between value of social studies and the four outlined indicators of active citizenship to be moderated by ethnicity (see Liem & Chua, 2013, for supporting evidence). We included age and socio-economic status (SES) as covariates, since it is a wellestablished finding that young adults and youth from more affluent homes score higher on active citizenship than adolescents and youth from less affluent homes, respectively (Jugert et al., 2013). We also controlled for gender. Empirical evidence on gender differences in this area is not consistent and underlines that gender-related patterns strongly depend on the active citizenship dimension taken into account (see Kuhn, 2010, for a detailed summary). Method Participants and Procedure The sample comprised 219 vocational and high school students (138 German majority and 81 Turkish-origin minority). Age ranged from 16 to 25 years (M = 18.26, SD = 1.79, 55% female).3 Turkish-minority youth were 88% second-generation immigrants, of whom 45% had German citizenship. Regarding the language spoken at home, 40% reported that they “always or almost always” spoke German, 58% reported speaking German “sometimes,” and 2% reported not speaking German at home at all. Most participants (n = 158) attended vocational schools.4 These participants completed the questionnaire during school. Additional participants (n = 61) were recruited online through immigrant, civic, or youth organizations.


7 Measures

Active citizenship. The study assessed four indicators of active citizenship: (1) political attentiveness (three items,  = .77), (2) collective efficacy (two items, r = .62, p < .001), (3) political trust (six items,  = .80), and (4) civic engagement (seven items,  = .80). Classroom experiences. We assessed open classroom climate for discussion (four items,  = .78) and classroom community (4 items,  = .80) to measure classroom climate. Structures for student involvement was assessed through opportunities to participate in school decisions (six items,  = .83). Finally, we measured value of social studies with 3 items ( = .84). All items are summarized verbatim in Table S1 of the online supplemental material along with scale references. Results Correlations of all variables are shown in Table S2 in the online supplement. We used path analyses to examine the impact of school-related factors on political attentiveness, civic engagement, collective efficacy, and political trust while controlling for participants’ age, gender (0 = male, 1 = female), SES (parental education and number of books at home), and mode of assessment (0 = offline, 1 = online).5 We also entered ethnic group membership (0 = German, 1 = Turkish-origin), as well as two-way interaction terms between ethnic group and all school variables into the equation.6 Significant interaction effects were followed up by testing simple slopes (Aiken & West, 1991) for different values of ethnicity (native German vs. Turkish-origin), using model constraints and computing bias-corrected confidence intervals with 10,000 bootstrap samples. Results are shown in Table 1. For political attentiveness, there were significant main effects for value of social studies, age, gender, and SES, indicating that participants who were older, male, from well-educated homes, and more positively disposed towards civic education were more politically attentive. There was also a significant open classroom climate ×


8

ethnicity interaction. Follow-up analyses showed that the effect of open classroom climate on political attentiveness was only significant for Turkish-minority youth (B = 0.32, CI: 0.11, 0.56), but not native German youth (B = -0.09, CI: -0.24, 0.08).


9

Table 1 Predictors of Political Attentiveness, Civic Engagement, Collective Efficacy, and Political Trust Political Attentiveness

Civic Engagement

Collective Efficacy

Political Trust

B -0.22*

95% CI a [-0.45, -0.02]

B 0.11

95% CI [-0.09, 0.29]

B 0.21

95% CI [-0.07, 0.51]

B -0.07

95% CI [-0.26, 0.13]

Age Ethnicity c SES d

0.08* 0.52 0.40***

[0.02, 0.14] [-0.31, 1.27] [0.24, 0.54]

0.10*** 0.39 0.28**

[0.05, 0.16] [-0.29, 1.08] [0.13, 0.44]

0.10* 0.09 0.04

[0.01, 0.18] [-0.99, 1.05] [-0.17, 0.24]

-0.01 0.01 -0.09

[-0.07, 0.46] [-0.69, 0.68] [-0.25, 0.06]

Online e

0.16

[-0.09, 0.40]

0.35**

[0.09, 0.60]

0.32

[-0.04, 0.65]

0.20

[-0.07, 0.46]

Open classroom climate

-0.09

[-0.24, 0.08]

0.03

[-0.15, 0.19]

0.07

[-0.16, 0.31]

0.02

[-0.13, 0.16]

Classroom community

0.08

[-0.08, 0.24]

-0.12

[-0.26, 0.03]

-0.10

[-0.29, 0.11]

-0.03

[-0.19, 0.14]

Opportunities to participate in school decisions

-0.04

[-0.21, 0.12]

.010

[-0.04, 0.24]

0.30**

[0.10, 0.48]

0.20**

[0.06, 0.34]

Value of social studies

0.51***

[0.38, 0.63]

0.16*

[0.03, 0.29]

0.29**

[0.12, 0.45]

0.02

[-0.10, 0.13]

Open classroom climate × Ethnicity

0.41**

[0.14, 0.69]

0.06

[-0.22, 0.33]

-0.05

[-0.44, 0.33]

0.32*

[0.08, 0.57]

Classroom community × Ethnicity

0.11

[-0.16, 0.35]

0.26

[-0.03, 0.56]

0.35*

[0.02, 0.66]

-0.09

[-0.33, 0.17]

Opportunities to participate in school decisions × Ethnicity

0.08

[-0.16, 0.32]

0.11

[-0.16, 0.37]

-0.35*

[-0.70, -0.01]

-0.29*

[-0.54, -0.03]

Value of social studies × Ethnicity

-0.09

[-0.31, 0.15]

-0.03

[-0.23, 0.18]

0.06

[-0.22, 0.35]

0.01

[-0.18, 0.22]

Gender

b

R²

.50** a

b

.32** c

.24**

.12*

Note. N=212. CI=Confidence interval; Gender (0=male, 1=female); Ethnicity (0=German origin, 1=Turkish origin); d SES=Socio-economic status; e Online (0=participants assessed in school, 1=participants assessed online). * p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001.


10

Results for civic engagement showed similar main effects for age, SES, and value of social studies; mode of assessment was also significant. This means that participants who were older, from well-educated homes, more positively disposed towards civic education, and who had participated online were more civically active. There were no significant interactions between school-related experiences and ethnicity for civic engagement (see Table 1). With regard to collective efficacy significant main effects for age, value of social studies, and opportunities to participate in school decisions were found. The main effect of opportunities to participate in school decisions was qualified by a significant interaction with ethnicity. Follow-up analyses indicated that the effect of opportunities to participate in school decisions on collective efficacy was only significant among native German youth (B = 0.30, CI: 0.10, 0.48), but not among Turkish-minority youth (B = -0.06, CI: -0.35, 0.23). There was also a significant classroom community × ethnicity interaction. Follow-up analyses showed that this interaction was driven by differently signed simple slope effects within the subgroups. More precisely, the effect of classroom community had a negative sign among native German youth (B = -0.10, CI: -0.29, 0.11), but a positive sign among Turkish-origin youth (B = 0.25, CI: -0.02, 0.49). Although both effects were not statistically significant, the confidence interval of the latter only slightly overlapped zero, which was also indicated by a p-value below the 5% level (p = .045). Thus, opportunities to participate in school decisions were only significantly associated with collective efficacy among native German youth and not among Turkish-origin youth; the opposite pattern was by trend found for classroom community. Results for political trust showed a significant main effect only for opportunities to participate in school decisions, which was qualified by a significant interaction with ethnicity. Follow-up analyses suggested that the effect of opportunities to participate in school


11

decisions was only significant among native German youth (B = 0.20, CI: 0.06, 0.34), but not among Turkish-minority youth (B = -0.09, CI: -0.31, 0.13). There was also a significant open classroom climate × ethnicity interaction. Follow-up analyses indicated that the effect of open classroom climate on political trust was significant among Turkish-minority youth (B = 0.33, CI: 0.15, 0.54), but not among native German youth (B = 0.02, CI: -0.13, 0.16). Thus, again, opportunities to participate in school decisions were only significantly associated with more political trust among native German and not among Turkish-origin youth; the opposite was true for open classroom climate. Discussion Our study shows that the effects of school experiences on active citizenship differ among native German and Turkish-origin students. The results can be summarized as follows: First, we found that our indicators of classroom climate were more strongly associated with active citizenship among Turkish-minority than among native German youth. We had argued that classroom climate should play a greater role for Turkish-origin youth, who may compensate for their relative marginalization in society by relying on communal and social factors to a greater extent than their native German peers. This hypothesis was supported for the relationship between open classroom climate and political attentiveness/ political trust as well as the relationship between classroom community and collective efficacy (marginally). While the latter pattern might be explained by the joint focus on social dynamics among peers, the former may be rooted in social dynamics within the classroom. That is, being encouraged and taken seriously when raising their voice might especially help young immigrants to explore their own political points of view (i.e., drawing attention and building trust towards the political domain). Since our reasoning behind the stronger effect of classroom climate on young immigrants’ active citizenship was primarily based on research


12

on civic engagement, the non-significant moderation by ethnic background concerning actual behaviors warrants further comment. Although a similar pattern was also reported by Godfrey and Grayman (2014), future research is needed to explore to what extent this result pattern generalizes to diverse forms of engagement as well as to other cultural contexts. Second, opportunities to participate in school decisions were only related to political trust and collective efficacy among native German, but not among Turkish-origin youth. One possible explanation is that participatory structures in school represent formal ways of engagement (cf. Mansouri & Kirpitchenko, 2015) and are therefore a stronger correlate of political trust among native German students. Thus, engaging in activities at school that involve dealing with school authorities and formal decision-making processes may primarily help to build trust in political actors and institutions among non-immigrants. Another possible explanation refers to the operationalization of this construct. Our indicator assessed to what extent students personally felt that they could influence school decisions and might therefore also reflect personal perceptions of influence and efficacy. Hence, native German youth might be more likely than Turkish-origin youth to project their own personal agency onto the agency of the group (i.e., collective efficacy). Support for this assumption comes from findings showing that more powerful people are more likely to self-anchor than less powerful people (Overbeck & Droutman, 2013). Third, the value of social studies was associated with three out of four active citizenship indicators and, as expected, these relationships were not moderated by ethnic background. Previous research has shown that value beliefs are more strongly related to citizenship competencies than expectancy beliefs, a finding that was also not moderated by ethnicity (Liem & Chua, 2013). Expectancy-value theory assumes that value beliefs originate from socialization and previous experiences with the task (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). Thus, while these values may in part be influenced by the quality of instruction in school, they


13

might also be formed by personal attitudes and interests towards civic issues, which are strongly related to active citizenship (Torney-Purta et al., 2001). Our study’s small sample size was a limitation, as it prevented the use of more sophisticated multi-level analyses to disentangle individual and school effects. The crosssectional nature of the data also prevented us from making any claims about the directionality of effects. Moreover, most participants attended vocational schools. Future studies should therefore look more closely at different school types, which was not possible within our design. Finally, we compared only one specific ethnic minority group to majority youth in Germany, which limits the generalizability of our findings; future studies should include participants with different national and ethnic backgrounds. In summary, the current results suggest that classroom climate factors play a greater role in active citizenship among Turkish-origin youth, while individual opportunities to influence school decisions play a greater role for native German youth. This finding suggests that if schools wish to strengthen active citizenship in all of their students, they may need to tailor their efforts to the different needs of ethnic majority and minority youth.


14

References Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage. Chan, W. Y. (2011). An exploration of Asian American college students' civic engagement. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 2(3), 197–204. doi:10.1037/a0024675 Eckstein, K., & Noack, P. (2016). Classroom climate effects on adolescents' orientations toward political behaviors: A multilevel approach. In Thijssen, P., Siongers, J., van Laer, J., Haers, S., Mels, S. (Ed.), Political engagement of the young in Europe: Youth in the crucible (pp. 161–177). New York, NY: Routledge. Flanagan, C. A., Cumsille, P., Gill, S., & Gallay, L. S. (2007). School and community climates and civic commitments: Patterns for ethnic minority and majority students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(2), 421–431. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.421 Godfrey, E. B., & Grayman, J. K. (2014). Teaching citizens: the role of open classroom climate in fostering critical consciousness among youth. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(11), 1801–1817. doi:10.1007/s10964-013-0084-5 Hahn, C. (2006). School influences and civic engagement. In L. R. Sherrod, C. Flanagan, R. Kassimir, & A. K. Syvertsen (Eds.), Youth activism (p. 556). Westport: Greenwood Press. Jugert, P., Eckstein, K., Noack, P., Kuhn, A., & Benbow, A. (2013). Offline and online civic engagement among adolescents and young adults from three ethnic groups. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(1), 123–135. doi:10.1007/s10964-012-9805-4 Kuhn, H. P. (2010). International perspectives on political socialization and gender: An introduction. In A. Ittel, H. Merkens, L. Stecher, & J. Zinnecker (Eds.), Jahrbuch Jugendforschung [yearbook of youth research] 8 (2008/2009) (pp. 11–24). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. doi:10.1007/978-3-531-92320-8_1


15

Liem, G. A. D., & Chua, B. L. (2013). An expectancy-value perspective of civic education motivation, learning and desirable outcomes. Educational Psychology, 33(3), 283–313. doi:10.1080/01443410.2013.776934 Mansouri, F., & Kirpitchenko, L. (2015). Practices of active citizenship among migrant youth: Beyond conventionalities. Social Identities, 22(3), 307–323. doi:10.1080/13504630.2015.1119680 OECD. (2012). Settling in: OECD indicators of immigrant integration 2012. doi:10.1787/9789264171534-en Overbeck, J. R., & Droutman, V. (2013). One for all: Social power increases self-anchoring of traits, attitudes, and emotions. Psychological Science, 24(8), 1466–1476. doi:10.1177/0956797612474671 Scheerens, J. (2011). Indicators on informal learning for active citizenship at school. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 23(3), 201–222. doi:10.1007/s11092-011-9120-8 Sears, D. O., & Levy, S. (2003). Childhood and adult political development. In D. O. Sears, L. Huddy, & R. Jervis (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political psychology (pp. 60–109). New York, NY US: Oxford University Press. Sherrod, L. R., Flanagan, C., & Youniss, J. (2002). Dimensions of citizenship and opportunities for youth development: The what, why, when, where, and who of citizenship development. Applied Developmental Science, 6(4), 264–272. doi:10.1207/s1532480xads0604_14 Soltani, S. (2001). The role of the Western host society in the adjustment of non-Western immigrants. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(11-B), 6189.


16

Statistisches Bundesamt. (2015). Bevölkerung und Erwerbstätigkeit: Bevölkerung mit Migrationshintergrund - Ergebnisse des Mikrozensus 2014 [Population and employment: Population with a migration background - Results from the 2014 microcensus]. Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt. Torney-Purta, J., Lehmann, R., Oswald, H., & Schulz, W. (2001). Citizenship and education in twenty-eight countries: Civic knowledge at age fourteen. Amsterdam: IEA. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1015 Zaff, J., Boyd, M., Li, Y., Lerner, J. V., & Lerner, R. M. (2010). Active and engaged citizenship: multi-group and longitudinal factorial analysis of an integrated construct of civic engagement. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39(7), 736–750. doi:10.1007/s10964-010-9541-6


17 Footnotes

1

It should be noted that most of the literature to date, focused on the effects of open classroom climate on civic engagement. While there is also research considering different school indicators as well as a broader spectrum of civic outcomes, the available empirical evidence is less prevalent and consistent. A profound consideration, which cannot be provided independently from discussions related to the measurement of constructs, national contexts of the studies, examined age groups, and level of analyses (individual or classroom level), however, would go beyond the scope of this study.

2

Flanagan at al. (2007) showed that the effects of democratic teaching on youth’s social trust held both among ethnic majority as well as minority youth. However, school experiences were found to explain a larger amount of variance among the latter group. Godfrey and Grayman (2014), in turn, examined the effects of open classroom climate on five different civic orientations. A significantly stronger effect among minority than among majority youth was only reported for sociopolitical efficacy.

3

Ninety percent of the sample was between 16 and 20 years old. The reason that the sample also included students over 20 is that the German vocational school system also offers courses in areas such as job skills and applying for employment to young adults who have not found work after school.

4

In the German school system, students who do not attend the higher track (Gymnasium) that qualifies for studying at University usually attend vocational schools that train students in practical professions. Students in vocational schools typically attend both school lessons in school and practical training in companies (i.e., dual education system).

SCHOOL AND ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP 5

18

Mode of assessment was included because participants recruited online all came from civic youth organizations and it was therefore to be expected that they would score higher on active citizenship than students sampled offline (i.e., vocational school students). As we did not ask respondents recruited online which type of school they attended, we could not control for school type in the analysis.

6

Since this model was saturated (i.e., 0 degrees of freedom), no model fit indices are presented.