User:Yzhang7/sandbox

Option 1

 * Article title
 * Civic engagement


 * Article Evaluation
 * The tone of the article is not neutral and contains many statements that lean towards opinion rather than fact. The tone should be more formal. The article takes on certain positions without enough evidence to support it, which means not every claim it makes have a citation. There should be more citations under the "Technology" sections.


 * Sources
 * https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/18/learning/lesson-plans/guest-post-ideas-for-student-civic-action-in-a-time-of-social-uncertainty.html
 * https://circle.tufts.edu/understanding-youth-civic-engagement/why-it-important

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Civic technology


 * Article Evaluation
 * The article is neutral in tone and well structured. However, because there are too many sub-categories under the big topic, some sub-categories are not adequately or accurately covered. For example, the coverage of citizen technology in Asian countries is incomplete, which means it does not cover enough of the historically underrepresented populations. In addition, this article needs more independent news sources from reliable third parties.


 * Sources
 * https://datasmart.ash.harvard.edu/news/article/building-better-cities-civic-technology
 * https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/13440

Option 3

 * Article title
 * E-government


 * Article Evaluation
 * This article has a high degree of social discussion and news coverage, classification and structure are very clear. What this article lacks is that the origins and history of E-government are not enumerated and covered in sufficient detail. For example, certain countries under the "By Country" only has one sentence of coverage.


 * Sources
 * https://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/03/business/worldbusiness/03iht-EGOV03.1.17420751.html
 * https://www.nytimes.com/topic/subject/surveillance-of-citizens-by-government
 * https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/07/technology/jedi-government-tech.html

Finalize My Topic/Find My Sources
Civic engagement

What I plan to contribute/My ideas:


 * 1) Revise and re-summarize to achieve neutrality of tone in the article.
 * 2) Add more reliable sources for existing statements from political experts and publications. At present, this paper has a variety and multi-angle discussion, but appropriate and authoritative evidence is needed to support the diversity.
 * 3) Re-construct the "Technology" section. There should be a clearer and more detailed, categorized content with sub-headings, given that much of today's civic engagement is done through technologies such as mobile apps and campaigns under "Social Entrepreneurship".
 * 4) The "Benefits and challenges" section requires more than two pieces of evidence to support it, as the topic is usually the most controversial. Using only one source each for support under "Benefits" and "challenges" may result in bias.

Bibliography:

These are the sources that I will be compiling and using for my Wikipedia assignment.


 * Corbett, Eric, and Christopher A Le Dantec. “'Removing Barriersʼ and 'Creating Distanceʼ: Exploring the Logics of Efficiency and Trust in Civic Technology.” Media and Communication (Lisboa), vol. 7, no. 3, 2019, pp. 104–113., doi:10.17645/mac.v7i3.2154.
 * David, Nina. “Democratizing Government: What We Know about e-Government and Civic Engagement.” International E-Government Development, 2017, pp. 73–96., doi:10.1007/978-3-319-63284-1_4.
 * Dubow, Talitha, et al. “Civic Engagement: How Can Digital Technology Encourage Greater Engagement in Civil Society?” RAND Corporation, 2017, doi:10.7249/pe253. Education, Liberal. “What Do We Know about Civic Engagement?” Association of American Colleges & Universities, 29 Apr. 2021, www.aacu.org/publications-research/periodicals/what-do-we-know-about-civic-engagement.
 * Hsu, Pi-Chun, et al. “The Impacts of College Students’ Civic Responsibility on Civic Engagement via Online Technology: The Mediations of Civic Learning and Civic Expression.” SAGE Open, vol. 11, no. 3, 2021, doi:10.1177/21582440211031909.
 * Manatt, April, et al. Hear Us Now?: a California Survey of Digital Technology's Role in Civic Engagement and Local Government. New America Foundation, 2011.
 * Rahman, K. Sabeel. “From Civic Tech to Civic Capacity: The Case of Citizen Audits.” Apsc, vol. 50, no. 3, 2017, pp. 751–757., doi:10.1017/S1049096517000543.
 * Wensing, Alexia J, et al. “Towards a Core Curriculum for Civic Engagement on Appropriate Technology: Characterizing, Optimizing and Mobilizing Youth Community Service Learning.” African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, vol. 10, no. 7, 2018, pp. 867–877., doi:10.1080/20421338.2018.1439279.

New Sub-Section: Youth Participation
Youth participation has a critical impact on four levels: democratic decision-making, community cohesion, the personal development of youth themselves, and equity. Public services and programs contribute to the mental development of rebellious and vulnerable youth groups and change government patterns in the future. This kind of training can effectively mobilize and promote the participation of the next generation of citizens. Domestic and transnational educational cooperation is conducive to sharing and promoting the transmission and popularization of information and may achieve the effect of promoting social advancement and improving the living conditions of citizens and the environment. These educational programs aim to use social science and psychology to stimulate the enthusiasm and interest of young people to participate in government projects, thereby promoting the sustainable development of society.

It remains controversial whether the government has the right to guide and force teenagers to accept education in this nature. The design of such projects remains neutral and open. Experts suggest first identifying topics students value, then selecting a topic to discuss concrete actions and short-term goals that can be implemented and concluding with feedback and a summary. Teachers are encouraged to avoid bringing their political feelings and personal opinions into the classroom and instead to confirm that students' ideas are valid and valued.

On the other hand, the government could consider options for action by strengthening the sense of autonomy of young people in performing their civic duties and reducing the inequalities that currently exist in the K-12 education system. The general attitude of college students towards online civic responsibility, engagement, learning, and expression is positive. As a part of the education system, college students have the ability to create accessible participation platforms for vulnerable groups and more through their educational resources or to speak for these groups through in-depth understanding and community visits.

Under "Technology" Section
Efficiency and trust are observed to be the two main logics to effectively improve the effectiveness of the practical application of citizen technology in government projects. Communities can build consensus by reinforcing these two factors, reducing people's antipathy to public officials and social programs without removing legitimate skepticism, and reducing the distance that information barriers create when transmitting data. The confidentiality and security of civic technologies are factors in determining whether online public conversations are supported and popularized by the public.

Local technology has three levels of transformation and dynamic models, from information to participation, and to empowerment. Web portals, social media platforms, and mobile apps are effective models for reaching a wide range of audiences; Electronic monitoring and management, service efficiency improvement, and business training help ensure increased participation and smooth operation. Open and transparent feedback and data release are factors that encourage future engagement and data accuracy. Completion of this series of information transmission and summary promotes the improvement of the future civic participation model. Future government programs will be citizen-oriented, information-technology-themed, and measured by efficiency and clarity. Besides, citizen audit provides grassroots organizers with a more durable and stable cooperative structure and strategic shift. It is a method to test the effectiveness of policies and get feedback from citizens, and it can effectively point out deficiencies in current policies and systems.

References:

 * “Why Is Youth Civic Engagement Important?” CIRCLE, https://circle.tufts.edu/understanding-youth-civic-engagement/why-it-important.
 * “Enabling Youth Civic Engagement for Youth.” United Nations, United Nations, https://www.un.org/development/desa/youth/enabling-youth-civic-engagement.html.
 * Wensing, Alexia J, et al. “Towards a Core Curriculum for Civic Engagement on Appropriate Technology: Characterizing, Optimizing and Mobilizing Youth Community Service Learning.” African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, vol. 10, no. 7, 2018, pp. 867–877., doi:10.1080/20421338.2018.1439279.
 * Corbett, Eric, and Christopher A Le Dantec. “'Removing Barriersʼ and 'Creating Distanceʼ: Exploring the Logics of Efficiency and Trust in Civic Technology.” Media and Communication (Lisboa), vol. 7, no. 3, 2019, pp. 104–113., doi:10.17645/mac.v7i3.2154.
 * David, Nina. “Democratizing Government: What We Know about e-Government and Civic Engagement.” International E-Government Development, 2017, pp. 73–96., doi:10.1007/978-3-319-63284-1_4.
 * Dubow, Talitha, et al. “Civic Engagement: How Can Digital Technology Encourage Greater Engagement in Civil Society?” RAND Corporation, 2017, doi:10.7249/pe253. Education, Liberal. “What Do We Know about Civic Engagement?” Association of American Colleges & Universities, 29 Apr. 2021, www.aacu.org/publications-research/periodicals/what-do-we-know-about-civic-engagement.
 * Hsu, Pi-Chun, et al. “The Impacts of College Students’ Civic Responsibility on Civic Engagement via Online Technology: The Mediations of Civic Learning and Civic Expression.” SAGE Open, vol. 11, no. 3, 2021, doi:10.1177/21582440211031909.
 * Manatt, April, et al. Hear Us Now?: a California Survey of Digital Technology's Role in Civic Engagement and Local Government. New America Foundation, 2011.
 * Rahman, K. Sabeel. “From Civic Tech to Civic Capacity: The Case of Citizen Audits.” Apsc, vol. 50, no. 3, 2017, pp. 751–757., doi:10.1017/S1049096517000543.
 * Zemelman, Steven. “Guest Post | Ideas for Student Civic Action in a Time of Social Uncertainty.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 18 May 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/18/learning/lesson-plans/guest-post-ideas-for-student-civic-action-in-a-time-of-social-uncertainty.html.

To Cadencehsu
Hi Cadencehsu!

First and foremost, thank you for the suggestions and kind words of encouragement on the “Youth participation” and “Technology” sections!


 * The third paragraph of “Youth participation”: thank you for pointing the capitalized letters out. I will change them to lower capital.
 * The first paragraph of “Technology”: I will add more reliable evidence and explanation on the gap between different households. I will also make sure to add the geography/region for those households to improve clarity and data accuracy.

Thank you so much again for your peer review!

To Miawach
Hi Miawach!

Thank you for your advice on this article’s tone as well as complements on its structure and comprehensive content!


 * The sentence “Surveys show that white and Asian households…”: I will add more geographical details on the locations of these households. I will also include more evidence such as the history of the wealth gap and inequality to explain the cause of the disparity.
 * The last paragraph: Thank you for pointing the tone of the sentence out! I will revise the current phrase “it is an effective way” to “it is a method” to ensure neutrality in tone.

Thank you again for your time and help!