The Citizenship Education - Literature review Example

In what ways can Citizenship Education address children’s rights in education and promote young people’s participation? In what ways can Citizenship Education address children’s rights in education and promote young people’s participation? Many researchers attribute inadequacy of citizenship education to the fact that children (young persons aged below 18) are rarely treated as citizens in their individual rights. Nonetheless, to the limits that children are educated on citizenship, they conventionally learn their rights and responsibilities as the future adult citizens. Consequently, denying children access to citizenship education prevents them from learning that they are citizens and deserves to act in the same manner. Understanding the role of citizenship education in promoting children’s rights requires a deeper and modern understanding of citizenship as applicable to children rights, responsibilities, participation, in addition to understanding differentiated citizenship, where children are recognized as citizens. Such an understanding, although contentious, is touted as a necessary foundation for successful citizenship education. However, an important question is, “Can citizenship be used promote children rights and increase participation among the young population. Citizenship is in itself a tool upon which children are made to not only understand their rights but also the rights of fellow children. Roker & Eden (2002) notes that citizenship education helps children in dealing with sensitive issues. Children learn to listen and respect thoughts and feelings of others and as a result, handling sensitive issues becomes less problematic. Additionally, it allows dealing with issues raised for discussion that can cause discomfort to either students or teachers. Although some prefer avoiding dealing with sensitive issues, the discussion in classroom allows for invaluable learning about diversity and tolerance in a safe environment. As well as following the general guidelines for classroom discussion, it is particularly important when students are dealing with controversial issues such as children in the sex trade or children with HIV/AIDs that it be clear that it is acceptable to ask questions, seek further information and listen respectfully to all opinions with two underlying premises, there is no one right way to think and that there is no such thing as a stupid question. More specifically, students are able to understand principles of Convention on Rights of the Child, think critically about application of Convention on Rights of Children, and appreciate the interpretation of articles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child in cases where rights conflict. In English secondary schools, citizenship education was introduced in response to declining voting behavior and party membership among 18-24 year olds (Mori 2001), alongside increasing attention to anti-social behavior issues (Burney 2002). In essence, its implementation was aimed at educating students on their immediate rights as well as future rights as registered citizens. Notably, Roker & Eden (2002) challenged claims that young people are politically and socially redundant. Instead, they proposed that young people can experience active citizenship if well-equipped through citizenship education. Consequently, citizenship education is framed as a policy ‘solution’ to various problems faced by the young (Alcock 2008). Further, in highlighting how modern citizenship helps in promotion of rights, Faulks (2000) notes that modern citizenship is characterized mostly by its roots in liberal tradition, an ‘inherently egalitarian’ individual rights establishment. Further, Aubrey (2009) noted that citizenship education is a means through which educators can place primacy on universal human rights, in addition to enabling citizens understand the relationship between personal, local, national and global. Tam (2008) emphasized that in instances where neglect and abuse are readily identified, citizenship education trains children by offering independent educative support where parents fail to adequately provide it, in addition to encouraging children to speak where they are abused by parents and guardians or in instances where parents clearly fail to discharge their parental responsibilities. Recent citizenship education studies reveal that many countries consistently demonstrate that modern approaches fail to meet goals of equipping children with knowledge, skills and motivations which promote democratic citizenship. The studies suggest a lack of recognition and treatment of children as citizens as significant to inadequacy of modern approaches to citizenship education. In essence, citizenship education in its basic understanding attempts to espouse the right of children to be considered as citizens and as such entitles them to the rights enjoyed by other citizens. Conventionally, the concept of citizenship evolves from four basic ingredients which extend beyond the narrow understanding of citizenship as a legal membership to a political society. The first and fundamental ingredient enshrined in citizenship education is the basic rights. In his post-World War II writings, a British sociologist, Marshall (1950) made a case central to citizenship and extending beyond the simple legal membership to a political community but also expanded to create a sense of membership and belonging. According to Marshall (1950), what is necessary to providing a sense of belonging are derived from enjoyment of basic rights. If people living in a political community enjoy basic political, civil, and social rights, and understand that they have the rights, they develop a sense that they have value and hence feel that they indeed belong. Helping children understand these rights, give them the message that they are indeed, true members of their political community. Another ingredient through which citizenship helps in promoting children’s rights is in exercising of responsibilities. As Roker & Eden (2002) suggests, possession of rights is in itself not a sufficient citizenship component and hence increased and sole focus on individual rights allows for, or further promotes, passivity amongst citizens and in-ordinate private life attention. It further encourages self-regard/entitlement culture where citizens are centered on own rights/interests without adequate attention to extended social responsibilities as citizens. It therefore teaches the children to not just understand their rights but to practice their rights while taking regard of other people’s rights. It takes into consideration long-term health and viability of liberal democratic society, supportive of rights of all. In essence, the concept of citizenship enshrined in citizenship education, creates room for both responsibilities and rights necessary to create future responsible citizens (Bjork, 2004). Exercising of social responsibility is important due to the fact that it gives support to political community. Laws need to be obeyed and so, is the need to respect the rights of others. As a matter of fact, citizenship education contributes to promotion of the sense of belonging proposed by Marshall. Other than promotion of children’s rights, there are other elements of citizenship education which promote education of children. Active participation as an element of citizenship education is emphasized in Pateman (2009) as well as studies focusing on participatory democracy in Peterman’s tradition. This perspective extends beyond the view of citizenship education in context of rights and responsibilities only. The children are taught to understand that they have a right to input into decision-making and provide them with an opportunity for participation; this is only possible if they are equipped with relevant and appropriate education to make decisions (Boerhaug, 2010). Promotion of children’s education also stems from the sense of social responsibility which constitutes active participation. Educational institutions are also plagued with multiple society ills which are minimized through citizenship education. Young people are focus of suspicion/concern. They are depicted as being violent and criminal, in addition to having no interest in democracy. Further, they are considered to have a preference for street protest to reasoned argument, in addition to engaging in drugs as well as having abandoned canons of conventional sexual morality (Tutiaux-Guillon, 2002). This malign caricature of the young is adequately widespread to trigger alarm in media and sections of electorate. Where society is faced with problems, young people are viewed as the agents and victims of the unhappy state of affairs. In reality, it is easy to vilify the young wrestle with underlying causes to the alarms and panics experienced in the society. Nevertheless, it is clear and inevitable that citizenship education can be used to help in tackling the challenges. As a matter of fact, citizenship education is a response to growing and pervasive unease in the manner in which issues in the society are handled. In essence, citizenship education treats the young people as part of solution rather than cause of problem. Citizenship education, as a result, stands at a crisis-cross point in development of culture. It is the point where political ideology, educational policies and strategies for social inclusion converge. Additionally, Crick (2009) was clear with regard to the place of shared moral values at the epicenter of citizenship education. This report stresses importance of the children learning from the start with self-confidence, alongside social and moral responsibility behavior, both in and out of the classroom; both towards the people in authority and towards others. Such learning is important, not just in classrooms but also out of the classroom to places where the play and participate in community affairs. Giddens (2010) listed a number of values central to the emerging approach to democratic politics. Each of the values provides clear and radical implications for the manner in which government and schools understand the purpose of the values and develop policies. Its action autonomy to school implies as much choice as possible for pupils within general framework of curriculum and school ethos. In the second aspect, it emphasizes the concept of, “No rights without responsibilities” and to schools, this implies pupils, staff and parents, a democratic culture through discussion, negotiation and agreement around mutually agreeable rights and responsibilities. Further, it embraces the assertion that there can be no authority without democracy. For schools, this aspect is powerful value and has direct relation to the ways in which schools actively develop authority in democratic context. It ccosmopolitan pluralism aspect on the other sees citizenship education creating an expectation for young people to develop a habit of welcoming cultural diversity while philosophic conservatism helps in creating a philosophical caution in a climate of change. References Alcock, P. (2008). ‘The Subject of Social Policy’, in P. Alcock, M. May and K. Rowlingson (Eds.) The Student’s Companion to Social Policy (3rd Edition), Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Aubrey, J. (2009). ‘Globalization and Global Youth Work’, in J. Wood and J. Hine (Eds.) Work with Young People: Theory and policy for practice, London: Sage Bjork, C. (2004). "Decentralization in Education, Institutional Culture and Teacher Autonomy in Indonesia". International Review of Education, 50, (3/4): 245–262 Boerhaug, K. (2010). Norwegian Civic Education - Beyond Formalism? Norway. Burney, E. (2005). Making People Behave: Anti-social behavior, politics and policy, Cullompton: Willan Crick, B. (2009). Citizenship and the Teaching of Democracy in Schools. DfEE London Crick, B. (2010). Essays on Citizenship. Continuum, London Faulks, K. (1998). Citizenship in Modern Britain, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Giddens, A. (2009). The Third Way. Polity Press, London Marshall, T.H. (1950). Citizenship. (Cambridge, Cambridge UNIVERSITY Press) Mori, N. (2001). Survey of Attitudes during the 2001 Election Campaign, London: NS Putnam, R.D. (2009). Bowling Alone: Americas Declining Social Capital, Journal of Democracy, Volume 6, No 1. Roker, D. & Eden, K. (2002). ‘…doing something’: Young People as Social Actors, Leicester: National Youth Agency Tam, H. (2008). Communitarianism: A new agenda for politics and citizenship, Basingstoke: Macmillan Tutiaux-Guillon, N. (2002). Civic, Legal and Social Education in French Secondary School. Paris. Read More