‘I just don’t like the whole thing about war!’ : Encouraging the Expression of Political Literacy Among Primary Pupils As a Vehicle for Promoting Education for Active Citizenship

Henry Maitles, Department of Social Studies Education, University of Strathclyde

Ross Deuchar, Department of Primary Education, University of Strathclyde

Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, University of Crete, 22-25 September 2004. This is a revised version of the paper presented at the Scottish Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Perth, 27-29 November 2003 (see
Introduction– education for citizenship

Whilst some governments around the world are particularly worried about the desire by young people to participate in the decision making process, there is a near moral panic in Britain (indeed in most representative democracies around the world) that young people are apathetic, alienated and uninterested in politics. The 1999 EU election, the 2001 General Election and the 2003 Scottish Parliament election showed consistently low turnout. And, we must remember, amongst the 18-24 year olds voting turnout is much lower than for the population as a whole.

Yet, there is also evidence that although young people are alienated from formal politics, they are active and interested in single issue, environmental, political, third world and animal welfare issues (Roker, Player and Coleman, 1999), perhaps best shown by the youthful nature of the anti-capitalist/Globalise Resistance campaigns, the Jubilee 2000 campaign and by the involvement of large numbers of young people, including school students in protests before and during the second Gulf war in 2003. There is little doubt that single issue politics is still capable of mobilising massive support.

The Scottish dimension

Cognisant of this perceived lack of interest in formal politics but involvement of young people in campaigning politics, one of the main focuses of the Learning and Teaching Scotland Education for Citizenship consultation document (LTS, 2000) and the development document (LTS, 2002) was on the whole nature of education and exactly what should our education system be trying to develop in young people. In recent years, in common with many countries around the world, there has been in Scotland an emphasis on target setting, particularly concentrating on the exam results. This has tended to distort the nature of schooling and has meant that the wider issues have been kept in the background (Gillborn and Youdell, 2000; Nick Davies, 2000), despite some welcome rhetoric on the nature of inclusive and lifelong learning. Rhetoric or not, the language of previous Conservative administrations that ‘there is no such thing as society’, has been replaced by a language of inclusiveness and community. However, there is still a problem of over-concentration on exam targets as the central (sometimes it seems to be sole) measure of school.

What type of education for citizenship?

Attitudes as to what schools should do to promote democratic understanding has itself changed since the war. In 1949, the Ministry of Education suggested that ‘There are forward looking minds in every section of the teaching profession ready to interpret the old and simple virtues of humility, service, restraint and respect for personality. If schools can encourage qualities of this kind in their pupils, we may fulfil the conditions of a healthy democratic society.’ By the 1970s, Crick and Porter (1978) were arguing that the education system should be looking towards fostering ‘a person who has a fair knowledge of what are the issues of contemporary politics, is equipped to be of some influence, whether in school, factory, voluntary body or party and can understand and respect, while not sharing, the values of others’. Perhaps, in the new millennium, central to an understanding of the world are the notions of ‘society’ and ‘change’. Our school students need a perspective on both understanding and changing the world and the skills and knowledge should be geared toward and channelled into these concepts. For many this can be best understood by seeing education for citizenship as having three distinct strands: political literacy, community involvement and values. Problems, however, begin to develop as these are defined: there are almost as many definitions as there are those discussing them. Nonetheless, the political literacy strand has perhaps two main themes: knowledge and understanding of the society in which we live and the consequent inequalities that arise; and skills relating to the ability to critically evaluate information, weigh up evidence and draw conclusions. Community involvement can be wide ranging and can be both social and political. Occasionally the mixture of political literacy and community involvement can have interesting consequences as pupils involve themselves in protests (as happened in the south side of Glasgow over the M77 development) or ‘become’ vegetarian through examining animal welfare issues in schools or decide that the war on Iraq is something that they need to protest about. We should not see these as problems but as natural developments in understanding society. As Crick and Porter (1978) put it: ‘...if we want citizens we have to tolerate some of the unpredictable inconveniences of action and participation’.

Democracy in schools

Further, education for citizenship suggests that children do not only learn about democracy but also live it; this has implications for our schools and indeed for society as a whole. Firstly, there is the difficult issue of whether democratic ideas and values can be effectively developed in the fundamentally undemocratic, indeed authoritarian, structure of the current typical Scottish school, where many teachers, never mind pupils, feel that they have little real say in the running of the school. It has been argued that it is not possible (Arnstine, 1995; Puolimatka 1995; Levin, 1998). Yet, most teachers interviewed felt that it could, indeed must, be attempted. One actually claimed that he used the school system as an example of democracy or lack of it and another said that: ‘There will be some tension between the inevitable dictatorship of the classroom and the sort of ideas that you are preaching...it would be a good example for them of what's wrong with a dictatorship.’ (Maitles, 1998)

For schools, it means there should be proper forums for discussion, consultation and decision-making involving pupils and it should be noted that the recent Education Act (2000) from the Scottish Parliament enshrined Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the rights of the child, that young people should be consulted on issues that affect them and does insist on functioning pupil councils. However, the experience of school councils is not yet particularly hopeful; although there are some very positive examples (Polan, 1989; Dobie, 1998; Shinkfield, 2000; Taylor and Johnson, 2002), far too many are tokenistic (Hannam, 1998; Dobie, 1998; Rowe, 2000).

Children and controversial issues

Thus, for the individual young people, schools and society as a whole, it is important that young people’s views must be actively sought. Nowhere was this more problematic than around the issue of the 2003 Gulf war. The nature of the media reports and the millions of people on demonstrations around the world galvanized school students in Britain as no other issue has done. Opinion was divided as to whether there should be space in schools to discuss the complex issues involved or whether schools should keep these issues out. In particular, in common with other contentious or difficult issues, the argument was heard that primary pupils are too young to discuss an issue such as the Gulf war, which, it was argued, needs a greater maturity. Yet, the media images in a global age means that young children are seeing these issues and, as our evidence below shows, keen to discuss and try to understand them. Indeed, as Holden (1998) points out, it is entirely possible that these issues can be better discussed by younger pupils as young children tend to have ‘a strong sense of social justice and they want to be active in working for change’, whilst by the time they finish secondary school ‘these same pupils may be sceptical, possibly even cynical, admitting that they are unlikely to participate in democratic processes’. Bruner's viewpoint (1960) (cited in Short, Supple and Klinger, 1998) and backed up Ross (1984), Holden (1998) and White (1999) that ' young people can be taught anything in an intellectually honest way at any age,' implies that the main issue may not be the ascertainment of the right age to teach/learn these types of issues but the methodology that is used.

Research methodology

In order to test out this hypothesis with regard to the Iraq war, we added interviews into a Scottish project examining the way in which primary-aged pupils interpret ‘enterprising’ behaviour. A sample of ten non-representative Scottish primary schools from seven local education authorities has provided the setting for specific case studies. The schools are located within a range of inner-city, town and rural settings and with a variety of socio-economic backgrounds. In each case study class, pupils from either primary 6 or primary 7 have been asked to draw an ‘enterprising person’ and to note the qualities of someone who is enterprising. Follow-up discussion groups have allowed the pupils to share their ideas, justify their choices and expand upon their perceptions of enterprising values. This use of informal discussions with pupils has enabled the researchers to evaluate the extent to which children’s perceptions of enterprise may reflect individualistic or communitarian values, and whether they are politically literate in relation to local and global affairs.

The data that is described in the next section stemmed from group discussions carried out with a small sample of nine primary 7 pupils in a non-denominational school, located within a reasonably prosperous socio-economic area in a West of Scotland town. During initial pupil drawing and writing tasks in class, it emerged that many pupils had made drawings of Tony Blair and George Bush and regarded them as holding certain enterprising qualities. This gathering of data was taking place during the spring of 2003 against the backdrop of the outbreak of war in Iraq. Media speculation at this time gave rise to the suggestion that many white Scots were somewhat disengaged with the issues surrounding the war in Iraq in comparison with the ethnic minorities in Britain. It was therefore seen as an advantage to the research methodology on this occasion to focus on the pupil attitudes and values surrounding the war within a case study comprising of exclusively white Scottish pupils, in order to gauge the opinion of this particular ethnic group. The class had recently been involved in studying an environmental studies topic on World War 2, and it emerged that the pupils had often made comparisons between their understanding of the topic and current issues such as the war in Iraq.

Interviews were conducted with pupils in small discussion groups, initially in March 2003 (several days before the outbreak of war) and ultimately in May 2003 (six weeks after the end of the war). The initial interviews were conducted against the backdrop of a divided Britain, with many anti-war demonstrations being reported in the media and with daily news broadcasts focussing on the extent to which political parties and, indeed, Tony Blair’s Cabinet itself, appeared divided over the issues. Conversely, the second set of interviews took place during a period when the mood of the country had changed, and many former opponents of the war had become more pro-war in their attitudes due to, among other things, the influence of the British media and the fact that British troops had been actively involved in fighting. The small sample of children was selected from the focus class to reflect a range of pupil attainment levels and a suitable gender mix

In addition, the teacher assigned to the focus class was also interviewed about the methodology she used when addressing controversial issues with pupils. Anonymity of school, pupils and teacher was guaranteed, and it was agreed that children would be referred to by their first initials only. Pupil discussions moved on from an initial analysis of the qualities of the two political leaders involved to debating many of the issues surrounding the war in Iraq. These discussions provided clear evidence of these pupils’ political interest and engagement in world affairs, often at a very mature level.

Research findings 1 – the pupils

Through their initial drawings, written comments and follow-up discussions, it was found that the main qualities that pupils associated with enterprise could be defined as the need to be brave, confident, prepared to take risks and the ability to be a good leader. They also felt it should encompass a certain degree of responsible and caring behaviour and values. Pupils seemed able to relate these qualities to both George Bush and Tony Blair in some respects, but not others. They were also generally reluctant to associate responsible and caring traits with either Bush or Blair and, in fact, some were definite about Bush’s more negative characteristics:

President Bush …there’s some ways he’s enterprising and some ways he’s stupid as well. He has to talk in front of millions and millions of people in his country … but I don’t think he should go to war with Iraq … he’s power crazy. (T)

Some people say he’s (George Bush) quite power-hungry. (L)

It’s a case that if George bush goes into something, Tony Blair has always got to be right behind him. (T)

These initial discussions led to further debate among pupils about the reasons for Britain and America going into the war, and the pros and cons of the conflict taking place. Some pupils felt that the outbreak of war was inevitable because Saddam Hussein ‘had bombs’ and was ‘trying to do what Hitler was trying to do – rule the world.’ However, others had quite different opinions:

I think George Bush is the one that’s really wrong, I think he’s bonkers and he’s the one that’s trying to complete what Hitler was trying to do and not Saddam … and he’s getting Britain to help him.’ (J)

It’s because of oil – because Iraq stole oil off of Spain and now Britain’s not daft … they want it. (T)

Why are they bombing innocent Iraqis? He was after Bin Laden and then all of a sudden Saddam Hussein popped up out of nowhere and he started with him. (T2)

Just as pupils had conflicting ideas about the causes of the war and different opinions about its worth, their views on the British/American alliance were also at odds:

When we were doing our topic on World War 2, America wouldn’t help Britain so I don’t think that we should have joined right at the start, I think we should have waited till something major had happened. (S2)

America have helped us, so we should return the favour …I think the U.N. has a point there but we still had to return a favour from years ago. (S and L)

From these initial discussions, it seemed that these children were showing evidence of some developing political views in relation to the causes of the Iraq war, the players involved and the moral reasons for and against the conflict. While they appeared to associate some enterprising qualities with both Bush and Blair, such as confidence and courage, they also appeared to dislike the power-hungry nature of Bush and the tendency of Blair to follow his motives. While some regarded the outbreak of war as stemming from the barbaric practices of Saddam Hussein, others viewed Bush as being no less of a dictator and felt sorry for the innocent people in Iraq who had suffered. Some appeared to have fairly reflective views on the causes of the conflict (such as the search for oil), although the accuracy of knowledge behind these views was still in its infancy. Their recent engagement with a topic on World War 2 appeared to have informed them of previous alliances and to have given them strong views either for or against a British/American coalition.

Some pupils appeared passionate about key events during the war, such as the emotions they had experienced on the day that they had seen the Iraqi people celebrate as they helped tear down Saddam Hussein’s statue in Bagdhad:

I felt happy that they were getting their freedom back, I just didn’t feel right because they didn’t have enough food and water, and all the fires that were going on round the town and all the burgling – they were just breaking into shops and stealing stuff. (J)

I had mixed emotions about the day, because I felt happy for them that they felt happy taking the statue of Saddam Hussein down … but I felt sad because how could they go with the British soldiers that have been bombing them? … causing so much destruction to them? (T)

I think it was the right thing to do by celebrating because he’s been hurting innocent people for no reason and he’s been very cruel to the people and I think that celebrating was the right idea because they’re free of him and they don’t know where he is so they may as well celebrate in the time that they’ve got left. (S)