The Senior Project is an independent, student-led culmination of our high school experience. After three years of academic preparation, our seniors are ready to spend the last trimester of their high school careers applying the skills and knowledge they have gained to develop a project that is insightful, academically rigorous, and professional in nature. This year, we are proud to showcase a senior from one of our neighboring campuses, BASIS Independent Silicon Valley, Aarohi G.

Week 1 – The Beginning

Hi everyone! My name is Aarohi, and I’m excited to delve into the nuanced topic of civic engagement, how state governments can influence and encourage it, and my first week’s progress on this journey.

Background
From passionately researching and delivering politically-focused speeches to feeling a sense of helplessness watching the news, I noticed a unique combination of interest and inaction that characterizes my experience with civics. For years, I observed this same perspective in my peers and corroborated it with the common statistics that surrounded me; I knew well that the 18 to 24 age demographic of voters historically has had the lowest turnout, with a little over half voting in the 2020 election. As a result, young people are often perceived as apathetic to political concerns; however, CIRCLE at Tufts hopes to discredit these beliefs, indicating through research that an uneven civic education and other barriers to participation are major contributors to these trends.

I realized then that, to navigate this complex issue, I must understand how the government can extend a hand to these age groups and inspire increased participation.

Which brings me to my research question: how can state governments engage young voters (18-24 year-olds) and high schoolers in sustained civic participation through programs and legislation?

Method
To investigate this, I’ll draw from available datasets and analyze them across two stages: the first studying the impact on voter turnout, and the second researching non-voting methods of participation.

Stage 1
In this stage, I’ll assess the impact of Same-Day Voter Registration, where people can register and vote on Election Day; Automatic Voter Registration, where eligible individuals are automatically registered when interacting with government agencies such as the DMV; access to polling sites on college campuses; and the ability to pre-register to vote. To study this, I will conduct a difference-in-differences analysis of states within groups that have similar levels of fluctuation in their voter turnout rate over time. With this similarity, I’ll be able to clearly determine how, as one or more states incorporate a new policy, their voter turnout trends shift or diverge.

Stage 2
Second, to measure interest among the nonvoting population, this project will explore the impact of optional engagement and volunteering opportunities such as being a member of a Youth Advisory Council, or abiding by a mandatory civics education requirement in high school. I’ll quantify engagement as the frequency of voluntary petition-signing or submission of public comment–a direct communication to government agencies about proposed regulations or policies.

Stage 3
Finally, to augment the analysis with qualitative data, I will study existing interviews with local officials, students, and young voters, then conduct new ones.

Thus, this project will provide a comprehensive and refined list of improved strategies that can aid states with low engagement and truly include the youth in civic issues.

Week 1
To kick off the first stage, I’ve gathered voter turnout data from KFF, an independent information organization. I compiled the information on voter turnout of 18-24 year olds as a share of their voting population in every national and midterm election from 2014 to 2024. Then, I calculated the coefficient of variation for each state’s turnout over this period of time, categorizing them as Low, Medium, and High Volatility states. Within these categories, I aimed to find the best matches by determining the similarities of these states’ trends to each other through calculating their Euclidean Distance to each other. With these two metrics, I organized the most similar states in groups of three. In the next steps, I’ll be assessing any differences in behavior after the introduction of Same-Day Voter Registration.

Week 2 – Same-Day Success?

Last week, we discussed Stage 1 of my methodology, where I assess the impact of legislation on voter turnout. In pursuing this goal, I start by comparing states’ turnout trends to each other before and after one adopts the policy of Same Day Voter Registration (SDVR).

What is Same Day Voter Registration?
While registration to vote is a requirement to participate with a deadline before Election Day, SDVR allows eligible voters to register and cast their ballot on the same day. Whether that’s only during Election Day, the early voting period alone, or both, depends on the state. As of October, 2024, twenty-three states and Washington D.C have adopted this legislation across a several decades-long timeframe; Wyoming, Washington, and Wisconsin implemented it in the 1970s, while Colorado and Idaho did in 2022 and 2023 respectively.

Current Literature
Same Day Voter Registration has historically elicited mixed reactions. Proponents applaud it for accommodating voters who face accessibility barriers, such as transportation or scheduling costs, and those who wish to get involved very close to the election. Others share concerns about administrative disarray and increases in uninformed or rushed decision-making on the voters’ parts.

Studies on the subject point to hopeful results, where SDVR successfully encourages voter participation. In a study by Grumbach and Hill, published in the Chicago Journals, young voters (aged 18-24) suffer from the usual registration rules since they move frequently yet do not interact with government agencies regularly to update registration information. And according to their Differences-in-differences analysis, SDVR increases turnout among young voters by 3.1 to 7.3 percentage points.

Week 2
Entering the week with this context, I aimed to identify states that would implement Same Day Voter Registration within my range of 2014 to 2024, since my voter turnout data encompasses this time frame. Then, I identify three control states whose voter turnout rates fluctuate similarly before SDVR was implemented, and finally, compare the level of change in their voter turnout afterwards.

Eight states had adopted this policy within my required timeline: New York, Virginia, Nevada, New Mexico, Maryland, Michigan, Utah, and Washington.

Using the strategy tested and refined in Week 1, I grouped similar control states by first calculating their coefficient of variation to categorize them as Low, Medium, and High Volatility states. Within these groups, I found the Euclidean distance of their data to each other, identifying the top 3 best matches to the state with SDVR.

Finally, I calculated the Euclidean distance post-enactment of Same Day Voter Registration, to measure divergence by the increase in the distance value.

This increase occurred for nearly every state in comparison to each of the three control states, with the exceptions of: Virginia to its first and third closest control, and New York to its second and third closest controls.

BASIS Independent Dublin is a Grades 6 – 12 private school, providing students with an internationally benchmarked liberal arts and sciences curriculum, with advanced STEM offerings. Considering joining the BASIS Independent Dublin community? To join our interest list for the next school year and receive admissions updates and more, please click here.