Global citizenship among students of Kazakhstan: the role of social media

With the increasing involvement of universities in Kazakhstan in the processes of internationalization, there is a need to adapt educational programs to the changing requirements of the labor market and the national educational environment. An important aspect of these changes is the study of the perception of global citizenship among students of Kazakhstan. In this article, the authors present the results of their two studies on global citizenship. In the first study, the authors set out to study the behavior of university students with participation in democratic processes and their use of social media. In the last decade, many researchers have studied the impact of social media on youth participation in global public life. Many of them noted the positive impact, suggesting that the use of social media would promote democratic participation, especially among the younger generation. Among the students of Kazakhstan, 284 students took part in this study. Participation in global and democratic processes includes five main elements: voting, political activism, consumer participation, protests, and communication with politicians. Our research has shown that university students in Kazakhstan most often express their support or protest within the framework of consumer participation. Students in Kazakhstan demonstrate a low level of participation in political activism, protests and communication with politicians. Regarding the second work of the authors, the study aims to adapt the Scale of Global Citizenship to the context of Kazakhstan, which is a key step in preparing students for active participation in democratic processes. The study used a cross-sectional design using quantitative methods for data collection and analysis. 374 students participated in the study. Based on the results of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, as well as reliability calculations, it was found that the Global Citizenship Scale has been successfully adapted for use in Kazakhstan, which confirms its applicability in the country.

1. Ostrander S.A. Democracy, civic participation, and the university: а comparative study of civic engagement on five campuses // Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 2004. No. 33(1). P. 74–93.

2. Nah S., Namkoong K., Chen N.T.N., Hustedde R.J. A communicative approach to community development: The effect of neighborhood storytelling network on civic participation // Community Development. 2016. No. 47(1). P. 11–28.

3. Colby A., Beaumont E., Ehrlich T., Corngold J. Educating for democracy: Preparing undergraduates for responsible political engagement // Jossey-Bass. 2007.

4. Lee T., An J., Sohn H., Yoo I.T. An experiment of community-based learning effects on civic participation // Journal of Political Science Education. 2019. No. 15(4). P. 443–458.

5. Rebori M.K. Assessing and predicting community board participation: The critical role of civic skills // Community Development. 2007. No. 38(4). P. 71–84.

6. Cuhadar A. Investigation of university academic staff’s and students’ democracy perceptions in terms of sex, subject areas, academic hierarchy, and political participation variables in the context of political socialization. Cukurova University. 2006.

7. Westheimer J., Kahne J. What kind of citizen? The politics of educating for democracy // American Educational Research Journal. 2004. No. 41(2). P. 237–269.

8. Teorell J., Torcal M., Montero J.R. Political participation: Mapping the terrain. In Citizenship and involvement in European democracies. 2007. P. 358–381. Routledge.

9. Boulianne S. Twenty years of digital media effects on civic and political participation // Communication Research. 2020. No. 47(7). P. 947–966.

10. Heiss R., Matthes J. Does incidental exposure on social media equalize or reinforce participatory gaps? Evidence from a panel study // New Media & Society. 2019. No. 21(11–12). P. 2463–2482.

11. Datareportal. Retrieved on Feb 20 at 2023. URL: https://datareportal.com/reports/digital2022kazakhstan#:~:text=Social%20media%20statistics%20for%20Kazakhstan%20in%202022&text=The%20number%20of%20social%20media,on%20data%20to%20learn%20why.

12. Sairambay Y. The contributions of new media to young people’s political participation in Russia and Kazakhstan // Central Asian Survey. 2022. No. 41(3). Р. 571–595.

13. Anceschi L. The persistence of media control under consolidated authoritarianism: containing Kazakhstan’s digital media // Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization. 2015. No. 23(3). Р. 277–295.

14. Kosnazarov D., Hashtag Activism. Youth, Social Media, and Politics // The Nazarbayev Generation: Youth in Kazakhstan. 2019. Р. 274–268.

15. Gay L.R., Mills G.E., Airasian P. Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications. Merrill. 2009.

16. Fraenkel J.R., Wallen N.E. Observation and interviewing // How to Design and Evaluate Research In Education. McGraw Hill. 2003.

17. Earl J., Kimport K. Digitally enabled social change: Activism in the internet age. MIT Press. 2011.

18. Weeks B.E., Lane D.S., Kim D.H., Lee S.S., Kwak N. Incidental exposure, selective exposure, and political information sharing: Integrating online exposure patterns and expression on social media // Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2017. No. 22(6). Р. 363–379.

19. Bond R.M., Fariss C.J., Jones J.J., Kramer A.D., Marlow C., Settle J.E., Fowler J.H. A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization // Nature. 2012. No. 489(7415). Р. 295–298.

20. Kaufhold K., Valenzuela S., Gil de Zúñiga H. Citizen journalism and democracy: How user-generated news use relates to political knowledge and participation // Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. 2010. No. 87(3–4). Р. 515–529.

21. Theocharis Y., Lowe W. Does Facebook increase political participation? Evidence from a field experiment // Information, Communication & Society. 2016. No. 19(10). Р. 1465–1486.

22. Park C.S., Kaye B.K. What’s this? Incidental exposure to news on social media, news-finds-me perception, news efficacy, and news consumption // Mass Communication and Society. 2020. No. 23(2). Р. 157– 180.

23. Anderson M., Perrin A. Nearly one-in-five teens can’t always finish their homework because of the digital divide // Pew Research Center. 2018. No. 26.