CitizED Report

Can citizenship education promote democracy and Britishness? A survey of trainee teachers’ attitudes on the purposes of citizenship education

Authors

Gary Clemitshaw*, Sheffield Hallam University/The University of Sheffield

Lee Jerome, London Metropolitan University

*Address for correspondence

Gary Clemitshaw, Division of Education and Humanities, Sheffield Hallam University, Floor 11, Owen Building, City Campus, SHEFFIELD, S1 1WB

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank CitizED for the funding to enable us to complete this project.

We would also like to thank CitizED colleagues who helped us to collect the data from their students and then to reflect on the preliminary findings during a seminar held at London Metropolitan on 2 June 2008. In addition we received useful comments from colleagues who commented on previous drafts of this work which have been presented at the following two conferences:

Lee Jerome and Gary Clemitshaw ‘Teaching Teachers to Teach Britishness?’ Civil Society, Democracy and Education, Conference organised by International Centre for Education for Democratic Citizenship, Birkbeck College, University of London, 14 June 2008

Gary Clemitshaw ‘Teaching Teachers to Teach Britishness?’ Crick + 10, CitizED National Conference, London Metropolitan University, 26 March 2009

Contents

Summary ………………………………………………………………………………………………………. / 4
Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. / 5
Section One:
Political discourse and governmental initiative ……………………………………………… / 5
Section Two:
The findings of the research - a review of the questionnaire responses ………… / 10
Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………………………….. / 18
References ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. / 19
Appendix 1 Identity and Diversity in the New National Curriculum ……………….. / 22
Appendix 2 Presentation and discussion of comparative quantitative data …… / 24

Summary

In 1988 the Crick Report declared the government’s intention to support citizenship education and the ‘teaching of democracy’. Subsequent revisions to the citizenship curriculum and public statements by politicians have increasingly focused on the additional tasks of teaching about identity and promoting Britishness and shared values. This report is based on a survey of student teachers’ attitudes towards these goals in citizenship education. We collected questionnaire responses from 103 student teachers across seven training institutions early in their training year (2007-08) , largely before they had substantial teaching experience, to find out the extent to which they agreed that these aims would underpin their teaching. The same respondents were then surveyed at the end of their training programmes so as to identify any change in their attitudes. The responses, which are analysed here, reveal deep scepticism about adopting simplistic approaches to the idea of British identity and wariness towards using citizenship education as a means of promoting specific values. They also indicate that student teachers have already begun to conceptualise their work in the classroom as facilitators of learning and promoters of learners’ independence, and that this process-led approach informs their commitment to teaching democratically.

Can citizenship education promote democracy and Britishness? A survey of trainee teachers’ attitudes on the purposes of citizenship education

Introduction

This report is of a CitizED[1] funded small-scale research project into student teachers’ attitudes towards teaching ‘Britishness’ and promoting democracy. The teaching of democracy has been an objective of citizenship education since its inception (QCA 1998) and so we thought it was timely to explore the extent to which this goal had been embraced within initial teacher education (ITE). But this project was prompted by the growing presence of the topic of ‘Britishness’ and national identity in political discourse at the highest level, which has been accompanied by a number of governmental initiatives to emphasise the idea of British citizenship.

The research project sought to evaluate the attitudes of trainee teachers of citizenship and history towards the notions of teaching ‘Britishness’, national identity and promoting democracy, alongside their attitudes to some aspects of multiculturalism. In some ways the trainee teachers can be seen as a sub-sample of British society and a representative sample of future teachers of citizenship and history. However, as teachers of these two subjects they are likely to be at the forefront of such curriculum objectives. A questionnaire was deployed to the trainee teachers in a sample of higher education institutions across England at an early point in their post graduate teacher training programme. The questionnaire was designed to produce quantitative data from immediate ‘agree’, ‘disagree’, ‘undecided’ responses to a small number of statements about British values, national identity and teaching democracy. It also generated qualitative data through inviting the respondents to explain their responses and their thinking in prose. The project deployed a phase 2 follow-up questionnaire to the same group of trainee teachers at a late stage in their training programme, and a small number of them participated in semi-structured interviews.

Section One: Political discourse and governmental initiative

The Ajegbo Report (DfES 2007) called for, and the recently revised National Curriculum programmes of study for citizenship (QCA 2007) included, an explicit requirement for citizenship teachers to teach aspects of ‘identity and diversity: living together in the UK’. The Ajegbo Report argued that this should include:

  • Critical thinking about ethnicity, religion and ‘race’
  • An explicit link to political issues and values
  • The use of contemporary history in teachers’ pedagogy to illuminate thinking about contemporary issues relating to citizenship.

This has informed the new National Curriculum in a range of ways, and these issues feature in the history and citizenship programmes of study and significantly in the cross-curricular dimensions and the aims underpinning the whole curriculum (see appendix 1 for relevant extracts).

In some ways these curriculum revisions might be partly explained as the incremental refinements that any curriculum subject goes through. On this reading it was inevitable that, as practice developed in schools, subsequent versions of the citizenship programmes of study, indeed of the whole curriculum, would reflect the lessons learned from that experience. It was also likely that some of the lobbying activities of practitioners and academics would have some effect and would influence the shape of the new curriculum. But of course such an evaluation would be partial at best, and politically naive at worst, and would ignore the sensitivity of a subject like citizenship to the wider political and social concerns. Therefore in this section of the report we will briefly illustrate the significance of the broader development of political discourse relating to ‘Britishness’, citizenship, and national identity in the last decade.

The election of the New Labour Government in 1997 prompted a new focus on citizenship, particularly in the arena of education policy. The Secretary of State for Education appointed an advisory group to consider citizenship education which presented its report, the Report of the Advisory Group on Citizenship and the Teaching of Democracy in Schools, in 1998 (often referred to as the ‘Crick Report’). The main concern that had prompted this initiative was declining levels of political engagement, exemplified by declining voter participation. It aimed at:

‘no less than a change in the political culture of this country both nationally and locally: for people to think of themselves as active citizens, willing, able and equipped to have an influence on public life …’ (QCA, 1998).

The report provided the foundation for a new statutory subject of citizenship to be established in the English secondary school curriculum in the curriculum review of 1999-2000, for implementation from 2002.

Despite the headline focus on politics illustrated by the quote above, the discourse of citizenship also had its focus on the implications of a complex and pluralist society. The first statutory programme of study for citizenship teaching contained a small number of learning outcomes which related to this. The curriculum stated that pupils should learn about:

‘the origins and implications of the diverse national, regional, religious, ethnic identities in the United Kingdom and the need for mutual respect and understanding ‘(DfEE, 1999).

The passage of time has seen an increasing emphasis on the implications of a plural and diverse society within political discourse, reflecting growing concerns about social cohesion (Cantle, 2008). This has brought together debates about the UK’s multi-ethnic society, immigration, urban unrest, and terrorism, and has in turn shifted these inter-linked discussions to the centre of government discourse and policy, rather than being on the periphery. This increase in emphasis has been prompted by a number of high profile events and developments, by the increase in national sentiment in Scotland and Wales, by urban unrest amongst ethnic minority communities in northern English towns in the summer of 2001, by the growth of Islamic fundamentalism and its link with terrorism, as experienced in the UK and wider international contexts, and continuing concerns about youth culture and youth crime. These have contributed to an intense focus on notions of ‘Britishness’, national identity and values, citizenship, history and democracy (Kiwan, 2008; Osler, 2008; McGhee, 2005). The quote below, from a speech by David Blunkett in 2002, then Home Secretary, and also architect of the citizenship education initiative as Secretary of State for Education in 1997, shows a linking of Islamic terrorism to threats to democratic political life:

‘The attack was, of course, a threat to economic stability, to commerce and social intercourse, but primarily it was a threat to democracy. It was not simply a terrorist action, but a fundamental rejection of the values of democracy’ (Blunkett 2002).

The following extracts from political statements provide a flavour of the ways in which politicians have drawn on these related concepts to engage with this discourse. They also illustrate the ways in which education has become implicated.

Gordon Brown, Prime Minister since June 2007, has made many interventions into the political discourse around threats to social cohesion, ‘Britishness’ and citizenship:

‘We have to face uncomfortable facts that while the British response to July 7th was remarkable, they were British citizens, British born apparently integrated into our communities, who were prepared to maim and kill fellow British citizens irrespective of their religion’ (Brown, 2006).

This social cohesion discourse has developed with the notion of citizenship at the very centre of it, but, as Starkey (2008) points out, this focus on social cohesion within communities was also accompanied by security concerns about those outside of Britain and thus legislative developments in relation to asylum and immigration also followed.

The discourse about Britishness therefore developed to accommodate security concerns focused on British citizens who attack their fellow Britons (because of a lack of positive identification with their fellow countrymen and women) and was extended to the process of immigration and settlement, to restrict the chance of such problems arising in the future. Hence new policies have been developed to ensure that immigrants to the UK seeking permanent residence and citizenship must pass a citizenship test, and that local authorities should organise citizenship ceremonies to celebrate the acquisition of the status of citizenship.

‘Becoming a citizen is an important act, because [people becoming citizens] are getting rights and in return for that they have to accept responsibilities. If someone comes to our country and is applying for citizenship or permanent residence they have also got to accept responsibilities’ (Brown, 2007).

Of course, accepting our rights and responsibilities as British citizens is just one aspect of the discourse which has developed. Jack Straw, another senior New Labour Government figure stated:

‘We have to be clear about what it means to be British … that [it] is a set of values … there is room for multiple and different identities … alongside an agreement that none of these identities can take precedence over the core democratic values …’ (Straw, 2007).

The debate about what reasonable expectations one might have of individuals to share a ‘core’ set of commitments or values with their fellow citizens is a perennial one among political theorists and, as Kymlicka (1995) illustrates, the extent to which such an ‘imposed’ core is compatible with respect for cultural diversity lies at the heart of the problem.

As Anderson (1983) explained, the ‘imagined communities’ of nations are created through several mechanisms, including the recognition and celebration of key people and events – the development of a national story, which seeks to exemplify the values which bind people to one another. History education therefore becomes implicated in this broader discourse. In 2006 Gordon Brown said:

‘We should not recoil from our national history … British history should be given much more prominence in our curriculum … a narrative that encompasses our history …’ (Brown, 2006).

Shortly after, Alan Johnson, speaking in 2007 as Secretary of State for Education, called for the mobilisation of the school curriculum for this project:

‘More can be done to strengthen the curriculum so that pupils are taught more explicitly about why British values … prevail in society and … I believe that schools can and should play a leading role in creating greater community cohesion’ (Johnson, 2007).

Against this backdrop, in the recent revision to the citizenship National Curriculum programme of study for England (QCA 2007) it is possible identify a greater emphasis on community and social cohesion. In the ‘Importance of citizenship’ statement it asserts that:

‘Citizenship encourages respect for different national, religious and ethnic

identities. It equips pupils to engage critically with and explore diverse ideas, beliefs, cultures and identities and the values we share as citizens in the UK.’

‘Citizenship addresses issues relating to social justice, human rights,

community cohesion’

(QCA, 2007: 27 – the first sentence of this extract also appears in the policy document as one of two stand alone panels in bigger, bolder type, on page 35)

One of three newly-defined Key Concepts of citizenship set out in the 2007 programme of study is entitled Identities and Diversity: Living together in the UK (QCA, 2007: 29). This development draws significantly on the report of the commission chaired by Sir Keith Ajegbo, Diversity and Citizenship (DfES, 2007). This was a report commissioned by the government in the light of the July 2005 London bombings, and it considered issues to do with diversity and British identity, and its implications for citizenship education. The ‘Ajegbo Report’ asserted that issues of diversity and identity tended to be neglected in citizenship education, in part due to lack of teacher confidence and training, and a ‘culture of avoidance’ (Brett, 2007, quoting Donnelly, 2004). The report also reflected the growing tendency within this political discourse towards linking citizenship education with history:

‘… it is important [pupils] consider issues [of diversity and identity] … through the lens of history’ (DfES, 2007).

In a recent report commissioned by the government, authored by Lord Goldsmith, entitled Citizenship: Our Common Bond (Ministry of Justice 2008) a number of proposals that link ‘Britishness’, citizenship and schools were proposed. Amongst others, schools were called upon to develop ‘citizenship manifestoes’ and organise citizenship ‘coming of age’ ceremonies for pupils. The ‘national narrative’ should be celebrated through a ‘national day’. Workplaces should develop an ‘Investors in Communities’ standard. There should be a nominated ‘Deliberation Day’ before national elections and new immigrants should be made to prioritise the learning of English.

In the foregoing extracts we have sought to illustrate the way that discourse and policy in the UK has increasingly focused on concerns about social cohesion in the first decade of the twenty first century. This has elevated notions of ‘Britishness’, identity, values, citizenship, history and education as offering some solutions to these concerns, in a way that has implications, in particular for citizenship and history teachers. It is not the objective here to explore the contestations that this political discourse has provoked amongst commentators and academics, which nevertheless are very important, but simply to sketch out the parameters of political and governmental discourse that provides the focus for this small-scale research project.

Section Two: The findings of the research - a review of the questionnaire responses

The data collected by this research project relates to the thinking of teachers who arguably will work closest with notions of nation, community and identity. Their responses to and reflections on the questions will illustrate some of the complications of student teachers’ thinking that will come to bear on professional discourse and practice in our schools.

The student teachers were asked a small number of questions which invited them to comment on whether they thought schools could be asked to teach values, whether they felt they could teach ‘British values’, and whether they felt confident about teaching to promote democracy. In addition there was a small number of questions about issues relating to some contentious issues that have arisen in political discourse and the media relating to the implications of multiculturalism.

The main questions which invited elaborated responses were:

  • Do you think teachers should promote democracy as the best form of government?
  • Do you think teachers should teach specific values to pupils?
  • What do you think schools can do to promote positive multicultural relations?
  • Do you agree that there are ‘British values’?
  • Do you think schools should promote a core set of values?

Additional questions sought to collect some data on the student teachers’ feelings about how these broad debates about ‘multiculturalism’ often play out in practice, and identified a few concrete examples.

  • Do you think the number of immigrants to the UK should be reduced?
  • Do you think school holidays should reflect faiths other than Christianity?
  • Do you think Muslim girls should be allowed to wear full religious dress in schools?
  • Should British culture accommodate the traditions of immigrants?

The responses to these initial questionnaires indicate a very diverse range of ideas about these contentious issues. The quantitative data certainly provide some results which at first appear somewhat counter-intuitive (see the summary in appendix 2), but the qualitative data indicate some consistent patterns behind these headline figures. These more developed responses indicate that whatever short answer was chosen, there are some common themes with which most respondents are grappling. In the following summary of responses we attempt to identify some of those themes and consider their significance in relation to teaching history and citizenship.