Examining School Participatory Budgeting within a High School Context

Student voice has been an inactive component of public education since its conception. Educational practitioners and stakeholders create, define, and uphold federal, state, and local policy centered on growing student educational outcomes. However, most often students are not provided space or opportunities to actively engage with policy or decisions that directly impact their educational experiences. To boost student voice, this action research study explored school participatory budgeting’s impact on student engagement with school decision-making, civic engagement, and leadership development at Arcadia High School. School participatory budgeting (SPB) is an innovative civic learning tool designed for students to learn democracy in action through the process of participating in the student voice committee on campus, developing proposals, and voting to fund improvement projects that build a stronger school community. This study utilized a parallel-results convergent MMAR that involved collecting both qualitative and quantitative data simultaneously, analyzing them separately, and integrating results into study findings. Participants included eight students that were members of the student voice committee. Study participants completed pre- and post-surveys as well as participated in a focus group. The study and intervention were supported by Mitra’s Pyramid of Student Voice and The Social Change Model. Results of the study indicated that school participatory budgeting had a positive impact on students’ engagement with school decision making, civic engagement, and leadership development. Results also revealed that participants were able to lead change for collective student voice, engage civically through real world application, encourage participatory democracy over elite democracy, and increase both communication and collaborative skills. Furthermore, an integration of quantitative and qualitative data was presented, along with connections to the existing research questions and literature. Additional discussion centered on the limitations of the study, implications for practice, future cycles of research, and recommendations for educational practitioners.