| Phase 1 |
🧭 Educational Alignment
This pilot directly supports the national Citizenship curriculum, offering a hands-on opportunity to understand local democracy, evaluate public information, and participate in real civic processes. It helps students move from passive observers to active contributors in a system that directly affects their community.
This component proposes a collaborative pilot between EHDC and local secondary schools to improve the clarity, accessibility, and democratic quality of public-facing planning documents.
Young people aged 14–16 will be invited to test whether consultation materials, notices, and planning summaries are understandable to non-specialists — in particular, those with no formal planning or legal education. This initiative draws inspiration from democratic models like Switzerland, where public engagement is supported by education from an early age, and from the plain language legislation in Sweden that mandates clear communication in public administration.
The pilot will serve two core functions:
- Plain Language Quality Assurance (QA): Students act as real-time reviewers, identifying terms, phrases, or formats that are unclear or misleading.
- Civic Learning and Legal Literacy: Students gain early exposure to how planning, consultation, and community rights work — preparing the next generation of engaged citizens.
An agile development model will be applied: consultation materials will be released in beta form for school-based review. This will be a live project — using real consultation documents currently under development — allowing students to contribute meaningfully to the quality of public engagement in East Hampshire. Students will learn to test the clarity of each document using structured feedback tools, based on the following principles:
📄 What Makes a Document ‘Plain Language’?
- Uses short sentences and paragraphs.
- Avoids jargon unless essential — and defines it clearly if used.
- Explains all acronyms on first use.
- Uses active voice (e.g. “We will review your response” not “Your response will be reviewed”).
- Includes a glossary of key terms.
- Follows a logical structure with clear headings and sections.
- Includes links or references when background context is needed.
- A 15-year-old should be able to read it and explain what it means.
Feedback is then recorded in a bug/comment-style system using categories such as:
- ‘vague’
- ‘legal jargon’
- ‘unexplained acronym’
- ‘missing glossary entry’
- ‘missing contextual link’
- ‘navigation unclear’
- ‘too complex overall’
This feedback loop allows materials to be improved before public release and teaches students how to identify and articulate barriers to fair engagement. The digital feedback tool should include tooltips linked to each category, guiding students with example issues, definitions, and suggestions for improvement.
To further enrich the educational impact, EHDC may also consider introducing an optional recognition scheme. Students who demonstrate strong insight, clarity in feedback, or leadership in the review process could receive a signed ‘Well Done’ letter or certificate from the council. This could contribute meaningfully to their personal portfolios, college applications, or future job-seeking credentials — reinforcing the real-world value of civic participation.
| Component | Youth-Led Plain Language Review and Consultation Feedback Pilot |
| What It Delivers | Ensures consultation documents are clear, fair, and understandable to the general public. Builds civic understanding and accountability in the next generation. |
| Function | Provides structured, school-based review of draft materials and creates a real-world learning opportunity tied to local decision-making. |
| Legal Basis | Supports Equality Act 2010 duties and public engagement obligations under the NPPF. Aligned with Swedish plain language standards and UN principles on democratic participation. |
| Completion Criteria | Pilot trial conducted with at least one local secondary school. Feedback integrated into revised consultation materials. |
| How to Implement | Partner with local schools via EHDC’s community education team. Prepare test versions of documents for student feedback. Track input using a structured bug/comment-style system. Students are introduced to basic principles of reproducibility — such as how to highlight the part of the document they found unclear, describe why, and optionally include screenshots or suggest a rewrite. Comments are logged and categorised (e.g. ‘vague’, ‘legal jargon’, ‘missing context’, ‘unexplained acronym’, ‘missing quick link to context’, ‘term not in glossary’, ‘navigation unclear’) to support iterative document improvement. |
| Timeline | Pilot launch within 6 months; ongoing term-by-term reviews if successful |
| Owner | Community Engagement Officers / Planning Policy Team / School Liaisons |
