Seeing through Civic Engagement among Chinese and American College Students
Civic engagement is becoming more and more popular among college students, both in the U.S. and in China. This study explores the similarities and differences in civic engagement attitudes and behavior of college students in both the U.S. and China. Three hundred and seventy college students from both countries participated in an online survey with measures of cultural values and of civic engagement attitudes and behaviors. There are significant findings in the study. Data were gathered to determine whether participantsâ€™ national cultures or cultural values would predict their civic engagement attitudes and behaviors. Specifically, hypotheses and research questions focused on the relationship among nationality, culture values, and civic engagement attitudes and behaviors. Also which group of participants have higher score in both civic engagement behavior and attitude, and why. Lastly, the findings have important implications for our understanding individualism and collectivism as these relate to national cultures. It also yields practical implications for college teachers and administrators who want to illustrate or want to improve civic engagement either in or outside the class for students.
Astin, A., & Sax, L. (1998). How undergraduates are affected by service participation. Journal of College Student Development, 39(3), 251-263.
Cohem, S., Doyle, W. J., & Gwaltney, J. M. (1997). Social ties and susceptibility to the common cold. Journal of the American Medical Associationï¼ŒJune 25: 1940-1944.
Cress, C. M., Astin, H. S., Zimmerman-Oster, K., & Burkhardt, J. C. (2001).Developmental outcomes of college studentsâ€™ involvement in leadership activities. Journal of College Student Development, 42(1), 15-27.
Eyler, J. (2000). What do we most need to know about the impact of service-learning onstudent learning? Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, [SpecialIssue], 11-17.
Flanagan,C. & Faison, N. (2001). Youth civic development: Implications of research and social policy and programs. Social Policy Report, 15(1), 3-14.
Galston, W. (2001). Political knowledge, political engagement, and civic education. Annual
Review of Political Science, 4, 217-234.
Gudykunst, W. B. (1997). Cultural variability in communication. Communication Research, 24, 327-347.
Gurin, P., Nagda, B. A., & Lopez, G. (2004). The benefits of diversity in education fordemocratic citizenship. Journal of Social Issues, 60(1), 17-34.
Haste, H. (2004). Constructing the citizen. Political Psychology, 25, 413-439.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Cultureâ€™s consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Hofstede, G. (1991). Culture and organizations: Software of mind. London: McGraw- Hill.
Hurh, W. M. (1998). The Korean Americans. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Hurtado, S., Milem, J., Clayton-Pedersen, A., & Allen, W. (1998). Enhancing campusclimates for racial/ethnic diversity: Educational policy and practice. The Review of Higher Education, 21(3), 279-302.
Institute of International Education (2001). Open Doors 2001: International Students total
Enrollment. Retrieved February 21, 2001, from
Jacoby, B. & Associates. (2008). Civic engagement in higher education: Concepts and practices.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Kim, U. (1994). Individualism and collectivism: Conceptual clarification and elaboration. In U.
Kim, H.C, Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S. C. Choi, & G. Yoon (Edss), Individualism and Collectivism: Theory, method, and application (pp. 19-39). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Maurrasse, D. (2001). Beyond the campus: Howcolleges and universities form partnerships with their communities. New York: Routledge.
Myers-Lipton, S. (1996). Effect of service learning on college studentsâ€™ attitudes towardinternational understanding. Journal of College Student Development, 37(6), 659-667.
Newton, K. (2001). Trust, social capital, civil society, and democracy. International Political Science Review, 22, 201-214.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Putnam, R. D. (1993a). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rhoads, R. A., & Neururer, J. (1998). Alternative spring break: Learning through community service. NASPA Journal, 35(2), 100-118.
Salaway, G. & Caruso, J. B (2008). Chapter 6: Social Networking Sites. The ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2008.
Simons, L., & Cleary, B. (2006). The influence of service learning on studentsâ€™ personal andsocial development. College Teaching, 54(4), 307-318.
Skocpol, T., Ganz, M., & Munson, Z. (2000). A nation of organizers: The institutional origins of civic voluntarism in the United States. American Political Science Review, 94, 527-546.
Sobieraj, S. (2006). The implications of transitions in the voluntary sector for civic engagement: A case study of association mobilization around the 2000 Presidential Campaign. Sociological Inquiry, 76(1), 52-80.
Tong, B. (2000). The Chinese Americans. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Triandis, H. C. (1990). Cross-cultural studies of individualism and collectivism. InBerman, J. (Eds.). Nebraska symposium on motivation, 41-133. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Triandis, H. C., & Gelfand, M. J. (1998). Converging measurement of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(1), 118-128.
Verba, S., Schlozman, K.L., & Brady, H. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vogelsang, L. J., & Astin, A. W. (2000). Comparing the effects of community serviceand service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 7, 25-34.
Watson, P. J., & Morris, R. J. (2002). Individualist and collectivist values: Hypotheses suggested by Alexis De Tocqueville. Journal of Psychology, 136(3), 263-271.
Zukin, C., Keeter, S., Andolina, M., Jenkins, K., & Delli Carpini, M.X. (2006). A new engagement? Political participation, civic life, and the changing American citizen. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.
How to Cite
- Papers must be submitted on the understanding that they have not been published elsewhere (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, or thesis) and are not currently under consideration by another journal published by any other publisher.
- It is also the authors responsibility to ensure that the articles emanating from a particular source are submitted with the necessary approval.
- The authors warrant that the paper is original and that he/she is the author of the paper, except for material that is clearly identified as to its original source, with permission notices from the copyright owners where required.
- The authors ensure that all the references carefully and they are accurate in the text as well as in the list of references (and vice versa).
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
- The journal/publisher is not responsible for subsequent uses of the work. It is the author's responsibility to bring an infringement action if so desired by the author.