Presentation by Márta Fülöp and Ian Davies at the 13 th citizED conference, Seoul June 2017.

1. Leverhulme International Network:Youth Activism, engagement and the development of new civic learning spaces Presentation by Márta Fülöpand Ian Davies at the 13thcitizED conference, Seoul June 2017.

2. Project teamIan Davies, University of York, UK.Mark Evans, University of Toronto, Canada.Márta Fülöp, Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience and Psychology, Hungarian Academy of Sciences and EötvösLorándUniversity, Hungary.Dina Kiwan, American University of Beirut, Lebanon and University of Birmingham, UK.Andrew Peterson, University of South Australia and Canterbury Christ Church University, UK.Jasmine Sim, National Institute of Education, Singapore.Project administrator: Alison Symington, University of York, UK.

3. We are working on a Leverhulme Trust funded international network project. Colleagues from Australia, Canada, Hungary, Singapore, Lebanon, and the United Kingdom are exploring the nature of and interplay between education and activism. We explore whether there is a virtuous circle between education and engagement in that one promotes the other; and/or whether these things may generally, or at certain points, be in tension.Through literature reviews and discussion within and beyond the project team, we are exploring the nature of activism, what might promote engagement, what might be the educational opportunities and pitfalls associated with such involvement and what processes might optimise positive educational outcomes.

4. The countries are not meant to represent types. The composition of the project team (varied gender, age, ethnicity, academic expertise and geographical base) is relevant to country selection. But we do have across varied regions and within specific countries the opportunity to consider a variety of issues and perspectives including: post colonialism, socialism, nationalism, provincialism, economic variety, different forms of democracy with varying approaches to the organisation and practice of education and schooling. Why these 6 countries? (Australia, Canada, England, Hungary, Lebanon, Singapore)

5. How do young people, their educators and policy makers understand and construct their civic activism, including different forms, spaces, expectations, aims, and learning and teaching processes? • What are the mobilizing factors and inhibitors of such engagement? • What are the educational benefits and drawbacks of young people’s civic activism principally regarding identity, capacity and efficacy for individual and social benefit from the local to the global? • What educational processes are apt for optimising the educational benefits of young people’s civic activism? Research questions

6. In this symposium we provide an overview of our 6 countries and then focus on England and Hungary.

7. Overview

8. Australia – engagement is a key official goal but activism is low, practised by certain types of people for limited purposes. Social capital and ethnicity are relevant. Canada – shift from traditional constitutionally oriented approaches towards cultural diversity and pluralism, human rights, civic conflict, global perspectives. Uneven levels of involvement. England – financial crisis, austerity politics and a neo-liberal agenda; fears about radicalisation; national identity; questions about youth engagement; 40% involvement (but what constitutes engagement?) Hungary - participation in elections; organisational activism; direct political activism; low levels of engagement (characterisations connected to the socialist past) Lebanon – post colonial context; high number of refugees and sectarian division; many are not in school and so engaged in very challenging ways directly in society. Singapore – post colonial context; defined as opposition party politics; 3 phases: turbulent student activism (1950s-80s); rise of national education (1990s; social media activism (2000s). How do young people, their educators and policy makers understand and construct their civic activism?

9. Australia – social media; social capital; age (12-17 less likely to engage than 18-24 year olds); desire to deliberate, not necessarily to vote Canada – pockets of good work in schools; cultural capital explains uneven experiences; availability of means of engagement – social media, community groups, NGOs England – SES and years in education are relevant Hungary – age (younger are more trusting); gender (girls more likely to engage); years in education (more years more engagement); residence (big cities politically active; and small communities active); parents/family (mother’s education; and right wing families) Lebanon – extremely active civil society; sectarian division, refugees etc., determine very different forms of engagement; campaigns concerning civil marriage, the trash crisis, citizens’ rights Singapore – use of social media; specific causes (e.g., LGBT, environment); officially sanctioned approaches (in schools and generally) What are the mobilizing factors and inhibitors of such engagement?

10. Australia - 3 main rationales for engagement all of which have educational aspects: guaranteeing and expressing rights; developing an efficient society; and achieving individual benefits Canada – some issues about cohesive national identity which relate to provincial and indigenous matters as well as to unevenly distributed social capital with questions of whose knowledge counts. England – voting and building the community; some research around benefits of activism for individuals and for other aspects (correlation between health, economic activity and sense of well-being) Hungary – voting and building the community (but within the context of low levels of engagement there are active groups e.g., protests against internet tax; higher education; public education (‘plaid shirters’ – teachers), Central European University recently Lebanon – Official characterisations tend to emphasise entrepreneurialism and self sufficiency (this may be subverted by youth to make things more relevant to everyday lives). Singapore – engagement to support strong and stable government; community involvement; social capital; civic identity What are the educational benefits and drawbacks of young people’s civic activism principally regarding identity, capacity and efficacy for individual and social benefit from the local to the global?

11. Australia - availability of social media; dedicated professionals; embracing of self expression; focusing positively and collaboratively on contextually appropriate attempts to overcome barriers Canada – a wide variety of initiatives some of which are sanctioned by individual provinces and some exemplary participatory approaches promoted by individuals and NGOs England–very positive evaluation of citizenship education programmes (now largely discontinued) – clear rationale, discrete delivery, certain areas difficult (e.g., global issues), assessment difficult. Hungary – virtual engagement may help; various school focused education acts, most recent is 2012; education for citizenship and democracy one of the 12 main educational goals, and civic competence one of the 9 key competencies; community service is mandatory; other developments – e.g., Political Capital and statement from the EötvösKároly Institute (Guidelines on the politics in universities) Lebanon – Significant division between private (over two thirds of schools) and state funded schools (the latter are typically of poor quality). Recent initiatives include BasmawaZeitouneh in Sabra and Shatila camp and the NGO Adyan. Singapore – National education introduced 1997; this includes the Community Involvement Programme; so, political activism has shifted to a more community-oriented activism focusing on social good What educational processes are apt for optimising the educational benefits of young people’s civic activism?

12. England – citizenship education and engagement

13. Prime Ministers’ views on engagement: Blair (1997-2007), Brown (2007-2010), Cameron (2010-2016) and May (2017-present) • Historical background England - Context

14. The third way (Blair) - communitarianism • “.. there is a clear expectation that all young people will undertake some service to their community” (Brown, 2009). • “The Big Society…. where people, in their everyday lives, …. don’t always turn to officials, local authorities or central government for answers to the problems they face, but instead feel both free and powerful enough to help themselves and their own communities”. (Cameron, 2010) • “If you believe you are a citizen of the world, you are a citizen of nowhere,” (May, 2016) Blair, Brown, Cameron and May

15. Background: connections between education and engagement • Henry Morris (Cambridgeshire village colleges 1930s) • Leicestershire Community Colleges (e.g., Countesthorpe 1950s, 1960s, ) • Eric Midwinter and others (urban community schools, e.g. Abraham Moss, Manchester 1970s)

16. Historically relevant activity e.g. League of Nations Union • General neglect or education for passivity (e.g., Ministry of Education (1949, p.41) “a healthy democratic society” can be encouraged if schools develop “the old and simple virtues of humility, service, restraint and respect for personality”) • 1950s-1960s: Civics for the ‘less able’; Politics for the academic • 1970s – political literacy (issues; procedural values and proclivity to action) • 1980s – global education (affective; holistic; adjectival) • 1990s – citizenship education (the 4th dimension, “voluntary obligations”) • 1998 – social and moral responsibility, political literacy and community involvement • 2014 – civics, financial literacy, volunteering and character Education overview

17. Teaching controversial issues (section 406 and 407 of the 1996 Education Act; guidance is given on political indoctrination and the duty to secure balanced treatment of political issues). • The Equality Act 2010 Advice for Schools • The Prevent Strategy (June 2011),’British values’ are democracy; the rule of law; individual liberty and mutual respect; tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs • Promoting fundamental British values as part of Spiritual, Moral, Social and Cultural education in schools (November 2014). • School Inspection Handbook (Ofsted January 2015) Official guidance in addition to the national curriculum

18. England citizenship education 2008-2013 • Key concepts (democracy and justice; rights and responsibility; identity and diversity) • Key processes (critical thinking; advocacy and representation; informed and responsible action) • Range and content (local, national, global; individual and collective; political, economic, social, cultural, moral).

19. National Foundation for Educational Research (2009) • School leaders and teachers are increasingly witnessing (and recognising) the positive impact of CE and the wider benefits it can bring to the school and to students, particularly in relation to student participation.

20. citizenship education had a positive impact on three key components of civic engagement: efficacy, political participation and political knowledge. This suggests that the reform is likely to help offset some of the trends in civic participation among young people which have shown a sharp decline in key activities like voting and voluntary activities over time. Whiteley, P. (2012). Does Citizenship Education Work? Parliamentary Affairs, 1-23.

21. Citizenship consolidated? Ofsted 2013 • In nearly all of the primary schools visited in this survey, citizenship was thriving…. The quality of citizenship education in the secondary schools visited in this survey was stronger than in the schools that participated in the earlier citizenship survey, which was published in 2010

22. Infusion: more schools were delivering citizenship through other subjects than was the case in the previous survey, but with mixed results. • Policy changes: uncertainty over the subject’s future had diminished the level of attention schools had afforded to citizenship. • Assessment: the formal grading and recording of pupils’ work in the subject remains relatively weak overall in both phases. Citizenship consolidated? Ofsted 2013

23. acquire a sound knowledge and understanding of how the United Kingdom is governed, its political system and how citizens participate actively in its democratic systems of government • develop a sound knowledge and understanding of the role of law and the justice system in our society and how laws are shaped and enforced • develop an interest in, and commitment to, participation in volunteering • are equipped with the skills to think critically and debate political questions, to enable them to manage their money on a day-to-day basis, and plan for future financial needs National Curriculum for citizenship in England since 2014

24. Identifying problems and developing ‘solutions’ that increase autonomy for individual schools in a context driven by a limited number of centrally imposed targets • Perceived need for greater discipline and increased individual volunteering • Citizenship education seen as party political property • Uncertainties about Britishness • Official preferences for traditional forms of knowledge • Research and inspection evidence has not been persuasive Why was citizenship education changed?