Encounters on Education

Volume 4, Fall 2003 pp. 1 - 10

Introduction

Citizenship education:
Theory, research and practice

Daniel Schugurensky and John P. Myers

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto (OISE/UT)

his special issue on citizenship education is the result of a collaborative

T effort of Encounters on Education and the Citizenship Education Research Net-
work (CERN). The articles in this volume issue are revised versions of papers that were
presented and discussed at the third and fourth CERN conferences, held in Toronto in
2002 and in Halifax in 2003, respectively.
The Citizenship Education Research Network was created in 1998 to provide a
forum for researchers, policy makers and practitioners in the field of citizenship educa-
tion. In its few years of existence, CERN has grown beyond expectations, rapidly
becoming a meeting place for citizenship education researchers, policy-makers and cit-
izenship educators. Although CERN originated in Canada (and is affiliated with the
Canadian Society for Studies in Education), it is pertinent to note that many of its
members conduct international research, and that its international membership has
expanded in the last two years. In this context, we are very pleased that these papers are
published in Encounters on Education, a trilingual journal that aims at generating a dia-
logue among education researchers from Canada, Spain and Latin America. The arti-
cles are printed in the language in which they were submitted.
Citizenship education is a vast field that includes a wide range of philosophical,
political and ideological perspectives, and of pedagogical approaches, goals and prac-
tices. At the most abstract level of discourse, there is a general consensus that the main
purpose of citizenship education is the development of good democratic citizens. In
terms of implementation, which includes educational policies, curriculum develop-
ment and pedagogical strategies, this purpose is expressed in different ways. Indeed, like
other educational fields, citizenship education has conservative and progressive orien-
tations. Citizenship education can be used as a tool for maintaining the status quo,
but also for empowering individuals and groups to struggle for emancipatory change.
2 Encounters/Encuentros/Rencontres

While citizenship education practices are situated somewhere along a continuum

between these two orientations, they tend to gravitate towards one or the other.
The conservative orientation to citizenship education privileges the reproduction of
the existing socio-economic order. From this point of view, capitalism and democracy
are perfect complements and it would be impossible to conceive of one without the
other. Among its purposes are instilling national loyalty, obedience to authority, vol-
untary service and the assimilation of immigrants. In terms of content, conservative cit-
izenship education deals primarily with national narratives, historical and geographical
facts, and the functioning of government institutions. From this perspective, citizenship
education should accept existing social structures, develop moral character and ensure
social cohesion. Good citizens are conceptualized as good producers, good consumers,
and good patriots. Representative democracy is the ultimate model, and voting is the
most important expression of citizen participation.
The progressive orientation to citizenship education privileges societal transforma-
tion and social justice. This tradition identifies an inherent tension between capitalism
and democracy, as the former generates inequalities and exclusion, and the latter
attempts to reduce them. Among its purposes are to nurture cosmopolitanism, critical
analysis, political engagement and cross-cultural respect and understanding. Citizen-
ship education should be primarily concerned with emancipation, which implies the
development of active, informed and critical citizens who can participate effectively in
civic life and in the affairs of the state. From this perspective, citizenship education
should examine gender, race and class structures, promote social justice and diversity,
and prepare citizens for inclusive political processes of deliberation and decision-mak-
ing. Good citizens are conceptualized as compassionate, politically engaged, concerned
for social justice and the environment, tolerant of others, willing and able to dialogue,
and active participants in public life. Following the insights of feminism and participa-
tory democracy, citizenship should recognize private as well as public activities, and
democracy should include greater public participation in decision making than casting
a vote every four years. In the progressive orientation, representative and participatory
democracy can and should complement each other, and citizens’ main task is to further
democratize our imperfect democracies.
Given the history of twentieth century education, it is plausible that the tension
between these two orientations will continue in the twenty-first century. This is
expected because in every community there are competing proposals about the mean-
ing of citizenship, the qualities of a good citizen, the characteristics of the good society,
and the strategies to move toward such a society. These competing proposals inform
different conceptions of what citizenship education ought to be. Given this situation,
policy makers, researchers and citizenship educators will continue to face political, eth-
ical and pedagogical choices. These choices will be the subject of passionate debates and
dialogues, agreements and disagreements. In the spirit of contributing to this conver-
sation, we would like to advance seven propositions for citizenship education in the
twenty-first century. These propositions attempt to bring together some of the con-
cerns, visions and strategies that are being discussed by progressive citizenship educators
around the world.
 Citizenship education 3

Seven proposals for twenty-first century citizenship education

From passive to active citizenship
The first proposition is that citizenship education should not only promote passive
citizenship (most frequently expressed in the uncritical acquisition of information
about historical, legal and institutional facts), but also active citizenship, which is about
revitalizing democratic public life, including school life. The development of informed
citizens is a necessary but insufficient condition for the development of democratic
societies. Citizenship education should nurture well-informed citizens who are also
caring, responsible and engaged, and have critical thinking skills. Promoting active cit-
izenship also implies expanding current programs of community service, so that they
include not only charitable activities and volunteer work, but also active involvement
with democratic institutions, with political proposals and with contemporary public
dialogues.

From national citizenship to planetary/ecological citizenship

The second proposition is that citizenship education should foster allegiance to the
Earth as a single community. This does not mean to ignore the relevance of national
identity and sovereignty, particularly in the current context of neoliberal globalization,
neocolonial dynamics and unilateralism. For instance, Canada’s status as a sovereign
nation-state allows it to protect its universal healthcare and to take a stand in support of
peace in the face of pressures to go to war. However, we should also consider that
important issues such as peace, human rights and environmental degradation are global
in scope and must be addressed collectively and cooperatively. In this context, an edu-
cation for planetary/ecological citizenship can help learners to move from an egocentric
and sociocentric perspective to one that privileges the planetary ecological system and
evaluates the implications of human actions for future generations.
A planetary citizenship education within an ecological context recognizes our finite
resources, raises awareness about first world over-consumption of non-renewable
resources, and addresses the race to the bottom in terms of corporate environmental
behavior and government policies (e.g. the rejection of the Kyoto accord). This educa-
tion also stresses the centrality of universal human rights as an inherent aspect of citi-
zenship. Finally, education for planetary/ecological citizenship would nurture the
development of a cosmopolitan democratic spirit that transcends the boundaries of
particular nation-states, promoting multilateralism and strengthening international
institutions like the United Nations.

From recognizing cultural diversity to fostering intercultural societies

The third proposition is that citizenship education should deepen existing multi-
cultural approaches by fostering the development of intercultural societies. Multicul-
turalism constituted a great improvement over the previous educational emphasis on
the assimilation and acculturation of immigrants and indigenous peoples. However,
multicultural education has not yet been developed to its potential. While critical tra-
ditions of multicultural education (such as critical race theory) have made valuable
4 Encounters/Encuentros/Rencontres

contributions, they have been relatively marginal in a field that often ignores issues of
power and oppression. Indeed, mainstream multicultural education tends to underes-
timate class-race connections, assuming that our societies are horizontal rather than
vertical mosaics. At the level of practice, in many instances multicultural education
has become tokenism, taking the form of superficial exercises that put excessive atten-
tion on the three Fs of food, folklore and festivities. Moreover, it is pertinent to remem-
ber that schools impart citizenship education explicitly (through the official
curriculum, extra-curricular activities and school governance), but also through the
hidden curriculum of rituals, regulations and informal interactions. This means that,
like other educational practices, a progressive multicultural curriculum may be contra-
dicted by exclusionary or discriminatory informal relations.
The word ‘multiculturalism’, by definition, simply recognizes a matter of fact: the
co-existence of various cultural groups in the same society according to basic shared val-
ues and norms that ensure sufficient levels of cohesion. The recognition of cultural
diversity is certainly meritorious, but citizenship education could move a step forward
by appealing to the notion of interculturalism, which explicitly asserts the need for
relationship, dialogue, reciprocity and interdependence. While ‘multiculturalism’
denotes a reality of mutual recognition that is not always due to voluntary disposi-
tions, ‘interculturalism’ implies a desire, a pedagogical intentionality for mutual enrich-
ment. Beyond differences of semantics, a citizenship education for the 21st century
should not be only about tolerating or celebrating each other, but also about nurturing
dynamic exchanges based on interaction, openness and effective solidarity while recog-
nizing power relations. Citizenship education should integrate the best traditions of
multicultural and intercultural education to develop political and pedagogical strategies
that contribute to overcome discrimination, racism and ethnocentrism, and to nur-
ture genuine, inclusive dialogue among cultural groups.

From preparation for the public sphere to inclusiveness

Our fourth proposition is that a twenty-first century model of citizenship education
should overcome the private/public dichotomy, promoting democracy and inclusive-
ness in public spaces as well as in families, workplaces, unions, and other institutions,
which are typically considered private domains. The twentieth century conceptualiza-
tion of citizenship has been focused primarily on the public sphere. By framing a uni-
versal concept of citizenship constructed on the attributes, identities and practices of
male subjects, gendered relations and the private sphere have been neglected. Following
insights from feminist political theory, a twenty-first century conceptualization of citi-
zenship should recognize that the personal is political, and that, through an institu-
tionalized sexual contract, public equality is often premised on private inequalities.
This conceptualization should go beyond the corset of the Wolstonecraft dilemma,
nurturing new and inclusive relations and practices in both public and private spaces
that recognize gender differences while ensuring inclusiveness and equity. It should
also go beyond the idea of quotas for women in formal politics, or strategies to
empower women to play male politics.
 Citizenship education 5

From fundamentalism to peace-building

The fifth proposition is that citizenship education for the twenty-first century
should move away from fundamentalist ideologies and instead help to build a culture
of peace. Two pillars of fundamentalism are manicheanism and self-righteousness.
Manicheanism is framed on a “good versus evil” mentality, and self-righteousness rests
on the dangerous illusion that our view of reality is the only one. Today, in a context of
increasing militarization, occupations, terrorism, civil wars and genocidal acts, it is
urgent for citizenship education to advance pedagogical strategies to promote coopera-
tion, dialogue, and a sustainable peace that is based on justice. It is obvious that citi-
zenship education alone cannot bring peace to our planet, yet it can make a valuable
contribution to create the subjective conditions for more peaceful situations. This
includes the development of competencies for peacemaking, conflict resolution, heal-
ing, reconciliation and reconstruction. It also includes an understanding of Gandhian-
based nonviolent civil disobedience philosophies, strategies and skills. A peace-oriented
citizenship education can foster the development of values, attitudes and skills to nur-
ture peace within ourselves and in our personal relationships, and to create the condi-
tions for peace in our own communities and in the global community.

From school-based citizenship to learning communities

The sixth proposition is that citizenship education for the twenty-first century
should expand its horizons, both in terms of curriculum content and pedagogical
spaces, from an almost exclusive focus on schools, to the creation of inclusive learning
communities engaged with a curriculum of life. This proposition calls to open the
scope of the curriculum, the spaces of pedagogical interventions, and the ages of par-
ticipant learners. This implies, to begin with, articulating coherently (through an inter-
disciplinary curriculum) different aspects of school life with relevant issues in the
surrounding community, from job creation to garbage disposal to human rights abuses.
It also implies nurturing democracy in schools, so that teachers and learners can prac-
tice democracy everyday instead of merely talking about it. This proposition also
implies broadening the spaces of intervention, including many out-of-school sites that
are not always considered as pedagogical spaces.
A possible strategy to start this would be to connect schools with other agencies
and organizations like museums, libraries, neighbourhood associations, social clubs,
community gardens, universities, cooperatives, community centres, political represen-
tatives, local media, arts and crafts clubs, and the like. Learning communities would
work through reciprocal networks than through hierarchical, bureaucratic institutions,
and schools could play a particularly dynamic role in igniting and maintaining those
relationships. This strategy could help to integrate schools with out-of-school educa-
tion, face-to-face interactions with electronic forums, and children with youth and
adults and seniors in intergenerational projects. Although schools were designed for
the needs of nineteenth century industrial production, they can still be important sites
to nurture the active, democratic and ecological citizens required for the twenty-first
century. Learning communities could complement this purpose by constituting new
pedagogical and democratic spaces for schools, other institutions and surrounding
6 Encounters/Encuentros/Rencontres

communities to come together, share their knowledge, learn collectively, and promote
local development and democratic governance.

From formal to substantive democratic citizenship

This proposition calls for an expansion of curriculum content, which should include
not only the description of formal citizenship, but also a critical analysis of the gap
between formal and substantive democracies. This implies a shift from an emphasis
on ‘constitutional citizenship’ to critical pedagogy. Learning the formalities of citizen-
ship and democracy is certainly a good starting point for citizenship education. How-
ever, this should be the beginning and not the end of the educational process, as a
curriculum centered on formal democracy has difficulties to explain the existence of
structural inequalities and discriminatory practices. If only half of the articles of the
1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights were realized, we would be living today
in a much more just and livable world. The same applies to many national constitu-
tions. It is important to study the principles guiding the functioning of democratic
societies, as well as the civic, political and social citizenship rights to which everyone
should be entitled, yet it is as important to understand why there is a gap between
them and the realities of everyday life. In interpreting the reasons for this gap, the cur-
riculum should examine the economic, social, cultural and political structures that pre-
vent the fulfillment of democratic ideals. This ranges from the impact of economic
globalization and structural adjustment policies on citizens’ quality of life (particularly
in the majority world), to the analysis of the causes of any unjust situation and exclu-
sionary dynamic at the national and local levels. In order to bridge the gap between for-
mal and substantive democracies, and between theoretical citizenship rights and their
enactment in practice, at some point the curriculum must address controversial issues
such as the unequal distribution of wealth, or the influence of power on the media
and the political system. It also must engage learners (and this bring us back to the
first proposition) in concrete actions to narrow the distance between the ideal and the
real world.

About this issue

It is in the context of these issues, challenges and proposals that the articles in the pres-
ent volume attempt to provide a contribution to the field by examining concrete mean-
ings and practices, both in national and international contexts. We believe that the
articles of this collection – which constitute a selection of those presented at the last two
CERN conferences – help to shed light on citizenship education models and practices,
both inside and outside schools. The forms and approaches to citizenship education
taken by the authors in this journal demonstrate a range of pedagogical approaches
and spaces to citizenship education, including issues of identity, interpersonal rela-
tions, intercultural understanding, lifelong learning, peace-building and political
engagement. The volume is organized in three sections: 1) conceptual models of citi-
zenship and citizenship education; 2) immigrants, identity and civic engagement; and
3) schools, teachers and learners.
 Citizenship education 7

Conceptual models of citizenship and citizenship education

The renewed interest in developing citizenship education that we are witnessing today,
claims Vigneault, is reminiscent of the philosophical interest of ancient Greeks for the
very same questions: the development of the citizen (‘la formation du citoyen’ in the
French original). The development of the citizen is a philosophical project with a ped-
agogical challenge: the acquisition of civic values and competencies. Vigneault claims
that critical thinking, a transferable civic competence, is the pillar for the development
of all other civic competencies. Drawing from Socrates, Vigneault argues that a critical
spirit begins with an examination of our own assumptions. Only when we take some
distance from our own knowledge and begin to doubt, can we understand our own
ignorance (the basis of the Socratic irony), and engage in genuine dialogue with others.
In the second article of this section, Westheimer and Kahne provide a conceptual
framework that identifies three main approaches to citizenship education. They argue
that the competing conceptions of citizenship education are based on political interests,
and that each conception has different pedagogical implications for teaching democ-
racy. Schools have been considered important sites for citizenship education, particu-
larly due to the strong correlation (put forward by Almond and Verba in The Civic
Culture in the early 1960s and confirmed by many subsequent studies) between edu-
cational achievement, political attitudes and expected participation. Based on a study of
citizenship education programs in the U.S., Westheimer and Kahne outline three con-
ceptions of the “good” citizen: personally responsible, participatory, and justice ori-
ented. They contend that the pedagogical choices we make in curriculum design are
based on implicit values, and have important consequences for the type of society we
ultimately help to build.
In the last article of this section, Folgueiras examines theoretical and practical issues
in designing an adult education program supporting active citizenship for adult female
immigrants in Catalonia, Spain. Using the insights of gender, multiculturalism, and
deliberation theories, among others, Folgueiras designs a conceptual map for commu-
nities to move from simple tolerance to mutual recognition. She makes a case for using a
participatory action research approach that engages the participants in the design and
evaluation of the program. Folgueiras understands citizenship as participation in the
political life of the nation and citizenship education as preparation for this participation.

Immigrants, identity and civic engagement

Opening this section, Long and Hughes present a study on the role of prior political
knowledge on Latin American immigrants’ political participation in Canada, and the
challenges for immigrants to participate fully in politics. In Canada, a country that is
presently struggling with the meaning of its own national identity and citizenship vis-à-
vis its relationship with the U.S. and as a member of the world community, the theme
of citizenship is particularly relevant. As the immigration laws have led to greater ethnic
and religious diversity over the past 30 years, multicultural citizenship has become an
increasingly important topic. In this study, Long and Hughes point out some of the
weaknesses in Canadian multiculturalism by examining the integration of immigrants
8 Encounters/Encuentros/Rencontres

as a restrictive manifestation of citizenship. They found that, despite immigrants’ desire

to participate in politics, they do not perceive themselves to be well integrated into
Canadian political life, particularly in terms of electoral politics, and feel restricted to
participation in grassroots politics.
Whereas Long and Hughes focus on Latin American immigrants, Hebert, Lee, Sun
and Berti provide new insights on immigrant youth, particularly on the ways young
newcomers build relationships that bear on their access to sources of political capital.
Using network theory to guide their research, and relying on drawings as a method-
ological tool, they explore the notion of relational citizenship. According to the authors,
immigrant youth develop vertical, hierarchical and competitive orientations to friend-
ship simultaneously. They understand friendship as a mutually alternating resource
that allows for weak ties of acquaintances, and facilitates social mobility, the trans-
portation of information, and integration. They suggest that the benefits gained from
developing close friendships in schools in order to access knowledge and skills is a nec-
essary but insufficient condition to assure integration and participation in society. They
also found that schools are important socializing spaces in which informal relation-
ships position students (both native-born and immigrant) peripherally or centrally to
networks of citizenship.

Schools, teachers and learners

The role of schools in citizenship building is also analyzed by Levesque, who addressed
this in relation to issues of identity and multiculturalism. In Canada, these issues are at
the center of contestation over the rights and roles of Aboriginal and Francophone
communities within the federalist (mostly Anglophone) framework. Contributing to
the scarce literature on educational research examining differences between Francoph-
one and Anglophone communities, Levesque compares the effect of regional culture as
embodied in social studies classes on the development of students’ understanding of cit-
izenship in two Canadian provinces: British Columbia and Quebec. These distinc-
tions are highlighted in education due to the decentralized organization of the
Canadian education system, which gives autonomy over educational policy and edu-
cational provision to individual provinces. Levesque finds that the differences accorded
to the two groups of students about citizenship center on the issue of identity and the
longstanding tension in Quebec between national and cultural identities.
In the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Feuerverger examines the role of
schools in contested nationhood and citizenship. She explores the experience of an
intercultural school in promoting tolerance, dialogue and peace-building among two
peoples with a long history of animosity and mistrust. The article uses an ethnographic
approach to examine the ways in which an intercultural school can teach about peace
and conflict resolution to Israeli and Palestinian students using dialogue. The school,
aptly named ‘Oasis of Peace’, was founded by Palestinians and Jews who aimed at
demonstrating -with the power of example- the possibilities for living in peace. The
article examines the educational challenges to breaking down barriers by looking at
interrelationships that exist in the school. The author recognizes the complexity of the
issue, which has psychological, social and personal dimensions.
 Citizenship education 9

In the last article of this section, Schugurensky and Myers explore the connections
between learning and teaching civics by relating teachers’ learning experiences to their
pedagogical approaches. Conceiving learning as a lifelong and lifewide process, and
employing interviews with teachers of the new Ontario civics course, they set out to exam-
ine the differential impact (positive or negative) on teaching of diverse citizenship learning
‘spaces’ that teachers encounter throughout their lives, from early primary socialization to
the present. They identified nine learning settings, and confirmed the important role that
informal and experiential learning play in the development of civic knowledge, skills, atti-
tudes, and values. In terms of the development of civic teaching competencies, a particu-
larly influential way of learning by doing was ‘learning by teaching’.
In closing, we hope that the eight works in this volume provide some insights to
advance the theory, research and practice of citizenship education. While the authors
approach the field of citizenship education from diverse perspectives and disciplinary
approaches, they share a collective concern with the emancipatory dimension of citi-
zenship education. To different degrees, all authors engage with past scholarship in the
field but also point out new directions for its expansion. We trust that this collection
serves as a modest contribution to the understanding of citizenship education today,
and to the development of a planetary citizenship education that seriously embraces
democracy as a system and as a way of life.

Daniel Schugurensky and John P. Myers, Toronto, Fall 2003

10 Encounters/Encuentros/Rencontres