Student Reflection
Title : Schools Councils
Author : Ben Howard
Produced by citizED
(a project of the Teacher Training Agency)
SPRING 2005
More information about the series of
Student Reflections can be found at
www.citized.info
Student Reflection – School Councils
School Councils: A paragon for participation
This paper explores the concept of participation in Citizenship education. Specifically, it
demonstrates the crucial role of democratic school structures, such as school councils, in
developing young people’s sense of agency, which is a necessary precursor to their
participation in public life in adulthood. While acknowledging the limitations of school
democracy, the essay argues that it represents a paragon necessary to ensure every child has
the opportunity to participate at school in an effective manner. To this end legislation for
statutory school councils is called for.
Introduction
"We aim 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 in public life and with the critical capacities to weigh
evidence before speaking and acting; to build on and to extend radically to young people
the best in existing traditions of community involvement and public service.”
(Crick Report, 1998: 1.5)
The introduction of Citizenship as a compulsory component of the national curriculum at key
stages 3 and 4 in September 20021 signalled not only a seminal moment for British education
but also potentially for British society at large. If Citizenship’s overriding objective to rejuvenate
the nation’s faltering democratic culture and arrest its declining sense of community is fulfilled
(see quote above), the embryonic subject’s significance will stretch far beyond the classroom.
While this vision of an engaged, active and responsible citizenry is rather ambitious to say the
least (if at all possible to achieve), it is a worthy and laudable goal, especially given the current
political climate characterised by apathy, alienation and cynicism. These trends are supposedly
more apparent amongst young people but this is not necessarily a recent or unique
development to our time.2 However, concern over the current health of British democracy
clearly, and correctly, guided the recommendations of the Advisory Group on Citizenship
chaired by Professor Bernard Crick. Its final report ‘Education for Citizenship and the Teaching
Citizenship was also adopted as part of the non-statutory framework for personal, social and health education (PSHE) and
Citizenship for younger pupils studying at key stages 1 and 2 in 2000.
2 It has been suggested that disengagement from public life is a common but ephemeral occurrence amongst young people and that
as they age and their stake in society increases so will their engagement and public activity.
1
Student Reflection – School Councils
of Democracy in Schools’ (the Crick Report), published in September 1998, advocated a
conception of Citizenship that placed the mantra of participation or active citizenship at its core.
This emphasis on participation was duly recognised when the Advisory Group’s proposals were
transposed into legislation via the Citizenship Order of 1999, with one of the three attainment
targets of the new discipline being dedicated to "developing skills of participation and
responsible action".3
However, despite the primacy afforded to active citizenship in the Advisory Group's treatise,
some commentators have suggested that the discourse sparked by it has so far focused upon
knowledge and understanding to the detriment of active citizenship (Linsley & Rayment, 2004:
1). Given the principal stated intention of the Crick Report to catalyse a wholesale shift in the
political culture of the country, this disregard for participation appears self-defeating and
requires rectifying.
This paper therefore examines the role of school councils as a strategy for delivering active
citizenship and offering students first hand experience of democracy. The argument to be
constructed is that providing pupils with a positive experience of participation and fostering a
sense of agency while at school is essential if the goals of Citizenship education are to be met.
Given this assertion the Advisory Group’s failure to recommend the statutory creation of school
councils will be questioned. Furthermore, it will be shown that representation and being afforded
a voice at school is a fundamental right of every pupil. In so doing, the discussion will highlight
the tension of delivering Citizenship within an autocratic and hierarchical institution, while also
touching upon key questions such as the feasibility of teaching pupils to participate and whether
politically literate children will actually want to engage in society? But first we turn to consider in
greater detail the centrality of active citizenship to the Advisory Group’s vision of Citizenship
education.
Citizenship education and participation
"An understanding of democratic participation and the confidence and competence to participate can only
by acquired gradually through practice, it cannot be taught as an abstraction."
(Hart, 1992: 5)
The other two elements are "knowledge and understanding about becoming informed citizens" and "developing skills of enquiry
and approach".
3
Student Reflection – School Councils
The Crick Report suggested a model for Citizenship education4 consisting of three distinct but
interconnected “mutually dependent” strands – social and moral responsibility; community
involvement; and political literacy. As the Advisory Group explains: “Our understanding of
Citizenship in a parliamentary democracy finds three heads on the one body” (Crick Report,
1998: 2.12). Fundamental to this vision of Citizenship education, what can be regarded as the
heartbeat of the three-headed beast, is the concept of participation or active citizenship. While
active citizenship ostensibly appears to relate most strongly to community involvement, it is an
inescapable part of all three strands and as the Crick Report points out “is our aim throughout”
(Crick Report, 1998: 5.3.1). Professor Crick even argues elsewhere that to be politically literate,
knowledge alone is insufficient and that this knowledge must be applied. In other words, one
must be an "active citizen" and not just an "informed spectator" (Crick, 2000: 123; see also
Crick, 1978: 31 and 37). The significance of the active or participatory side of Citizenship
education cannot be understated and must be viewed in relation to the Advisory Group's bold
underlying objective quoted at the beginning of the paper.
It must also be understood in light of the philosophical doctrine underpinning active citizenship
- civic republicanism. Central to this paradigm is engagement in community and political life, and
its revival in modern formulations of Citizenship should be regarded as an antidote to the
rampant individualism of the last few decades, which has generated widespread concern over
the erosion of traditional communal ties. While this civic republicanism view of normative
Citizenship education with its stress on participation and service is contested 5, a point noted by
Crick himself when he describes it as a "radical agenda", it is one he lucidly and pragmatically
defends (2003). It is also a position supported in this paper as it emphasises the importance of
duty and community, which are becoming increasingly absent in today's fractured society.
However, it is perhaps not surprising the Crick Report decided to emphasis the related concepts
of responsibility and service through active citizenship given the relatively prescriptive remit of
the Advisory Group’s terms of reference. It was asked to:
“… provide advice on effective education for Citizenship in schools - to include… the
duties, responsibilities and rights of individual citizens.”
(Crick Report, 1998: p4)
4
It should be noted that definitions of Citizenship education reflect the wider concerns of society at a given moment and need
to be seen within the political context of the time (for an in depth analysis consult Kerr, 1999: 218-223).
5
One theory on democracy states that too much participation is counterproductive and actually undermines the stability of
political systems by placing too many demands on democratic apparatus (for a brief discussion see Harber, 1989: 53)
Student Reflection – School Councils
The positioning of duties and responsibilities first is likely to be a conscious decision and not
accidental. Furthermore, it appears justified given the results of the first cross sectional survey
of the Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study currently being conducted by the National
Foundation for Educational Research. It found a high awareness of age-related rights amongst
students but a low level of participation in civic related organisations, which can be seen as an
indicator of community concern or responsibility (Kerr et al., 2003: ix-x).
To briefly recap then, the main thrust of Citizenship education is to prime students to take an
active role in democratic life. This demands that students develop the relevant skills, attributes
and dispositions to take part. Young people must grow up with a positive view of democratic
processes so that they are motivated to engage in public and community life when they reach
adulthood. This raises a fundamental question that penetrates to the very core of Citizenship
education - whether it is indeed possible to inculcate the desire to take part and be involved as
the concept of active citizenship demands. While it is impossible to answer definitively yes or
no, what is clear is that the most effective strategy for teaching or encouraging participation in
public life is by gaining positive experiences of democratic involvement. Political writers
throughout history have stressed the importance of experience and practice in gaining political
competence (see Entwistle, 1971: 6-8). The rationale behind this emphasis on participation or
active citizenship is that democracy cannot be taught via bland or remote abstractions but must
be a real and tangible experience for students. Hart sums up this argument succinctly in the
quote at the beginning of this section. The role to be played by school councils here in offering
students the opportunity to gain a positive experience of democracy should be self-evident.
However, while the Crick Report recognises the need for school structures to be congruent with
the teachings of Citizenship, it fails to advocate legislating for compulsory school councils.
It is to this we turn shortly but first it is worth noting that active citizenship and its corollary involvement and participation - runs much deeper than school structure and must permeate all
levels of school life. Although this discussion focuses upon school councils as an exemplary
approach to active citizenship at a school-wide level, a pedagogy of participation in place of a
traditional didactic style must also be adopted within the classroom. Studies have identified
democratic reforms such as this as crucial to the success of school councils, which are less
effective without parallel measures (Davies, 1998; Taylor & Johnson, 2002). Furthermore the
greater emphasis placed on discussion and self-learning demanded by participatory
approaches in this environment is key to achieving the Advisory Groups’ aspiration of an
invigorated political culture. Precisely because the defining characteristic of a democracy is
Student Reflection – School Councils
dialogue then nurturing this skill in the classroom among young individuals can only have a
wider positive effect on society.
The case for compulsory school democracy
“If we want young people to learn they can have some control over their lives and that they
can, collectively, improve the quality of life for themselves and others, we must let them
practice.”
(Cunningham, 2000: 133)
The introduction of compulsory Citizenship education has revived interest in school councils and
pupil consultation and representation in general. With their potential to offer pupils a taste of
democratic processes and practices, and an opportunity to become involved in school life,
school councils are an exciting prospect for Citizenship education. They represent one strategy
that can potentially deliver on all three strands of the Citizenship composite.
While the ability of the school environment to offer a genuine exercise in power-sharing and
politically active citizenship has been challenged (Lockyer, 2003: 125), what is abundantly clear
is that attempting to nurture the proclivity to participate in students within a school that excludes
them from having a voice is destined to fail. There may indeed be limitations to the democratic
experience that schools can provide but no more so than the limitations inherent to wider
representative democracy, which itself often appears weak. But do we argue that democracy
should be abandoned due to its imperfections? No, we don’t. Schools are indeed (as has often
been observed) a microcosm of wider society and their organisational structure should reflect
this. It is even possible to make the argument that the nature of schools allows (in certain
respects) for a more sophisticated democratic arrangement than in society at large (see Polan,
1989: 40-41). What matters is that imperfect as democracy is it still represents the most stable,
productive and desired form of social organisation. There is no reason why this shouldn’t apply
to school design. Despite (mis-placed) protestations that schools usefully prepare children for
an adult life in which they work within hierarchical organisations (Lockyer, 2003: 127), many
progressive and successful companies now consult staff on a wide variety of issues. The
benefits of this dialogue in fostering a workforce that feels valued and appreciated are widely
accepted and evident in terms of increased production and reduced staff turnover. On a more
abstract level, it can be seen that nurturing the skills associated with democratic teaching (most
notably the art of conversation) is becoming increasingly salient as society becomes
Student Reflection – School Councils
increasingly complex and functionally differentiated. It has been noted that many people now
sell their personality in the workplace rather than their labour power:
“a company no longer buys a quantity of abstract labour, but buys ‘personality’,
commitment, personableness and social skills, sincerity, emotional warmth and so
on…as labour, you have to sell your personality.”
(Slater, 1997: 194)
If this is true, then developing the ability of young people to converse and communicate, upon
which personality so crucially depends, should be a fundamental goal of all education.
Returning to the point at hand, the critical question, and one that has been posed by many
commentators (see for example Harber, 1987: 7; Hart, 1992: 5; Clarke, 2002; Gearon & Brown,
2003: 205), is whether an autocratic and hierarchical institution can successfully deliver an
adequate participatory experience of democracy. The Crick Report explicitly draws out this
relationship between the structural organisation of schools and Citizenship education on a
number of occasions. For example:
"The ethos, organisation, structures and daily practices of schools have considerable impact
on the effectiveness of Citizenship education. Schools need to consider to what extent their
ethos, organisation and daily practices are consistent with the aim and purpose of Citizenship
education."
(Crick Report, 1998: 9.1)
While the Advisory Group strongly endorsed school councils as a means to enhance the
democratic nature of schools and thereby the democratic experience of pupils, it failed to call for
their statutory creation. Instead, it states:
"In particular, schools should make every effort [my emphasis] to engage pupils in
discussion and consultation about all aspects of school life on which pupils might
reasonably be expected to have a view, and wherever possible to give pupils
responsibility and experience in helping run parts of the school. Such engagement can
be both through formal structures such as school and class councils and informal
channels in pupil’s daily encounters with aspects of school life."
(Crick Report, 1998: 6.3.1; see also 5.3.1, and 5.3.2)
This decision to leave the creation of democratic school structures to an organic birth is
surprising given Citizenship’s deep concern with participation, its imperative to experience
democracy first hand, and the Advisory’ Groups recognition of the important role to be played by
school structure in realising its goals. If we accept the proposition that Citizenship education can
only be delivered effectively in a school that structurally preaches inclusion and encourages
Student Reflection – School Councils
participation at every level from the classroom up, then democracy in the school environment
should be mandatory. Citizenship education in its active civic republican guise and democratic
schooling are inseparable bedfellows –they are two sides of the same coin.
The Crick Report’s explanation that it shied away from compulsory school councils in fear of
overburdening teachers is understandable, but the importance of visible democracy in action
within schools is too great to be left to individual devices. Bernard Crick’s own logic for making
Citizenship a compulsory discipline - that it must be compulsory to be effective (see Crick, 2003:
18) - must also hold true for school councils. Ultimately, if the democratic nature of schools (or
lack of it) is a key factor in their ability to successfully deliver Citizenship (as the quote above
from section 9.1 suggests), and if the success of Citizenship education as a whole relies on it
being a universal entitlement for all pupils (as Crick argues), then the democratic reform of
schools must also be compulsory.
Furthermore, while common sense tells us that the answer to the question posed earlier - can
Citizenship education be successfully delivered in an autocratic institution - must be no, this is
now being borne out by studies unavailable to the Advisory Group. The Citizenship longitudinal
study found that schools exhibiting democratic characteristics were the most likely to engage
pupils.
“Schools that model democratic practices and values, by encouraging pupils to discuss
issues in the classroom and take an active role in the life of the school, are most effective
in promoting civic knowledge and engagement.”
(Kerr et al., 2003: 9)
Additionally, students with the highest scores for civic knowledge were found to be more likely
than those with lower scores to say they would vote in the future (Kerr et al., 2003: 88).
Therefore it appears that those schools displaying democratic characteristics are more likely to
produce students who are inclined to vote – one of the key indicators of democratic participation
and fundamental to the broader aims of Citizenship. While the study admits that more research
is needed in this area, given the above conclusion, it would seem obvious that student
representation must be made a compulsory requirement of every school if the general long term
aims of Citizenship education are to be realised.
Apart from its direct relevance to Citizenship education, other arguments for the statutory
creation of democratic structures in school exist. Most pertinent of these is the fact that children
have a fundamental right to a collective voice and to participate when relevant. Articles 12 and
13 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child codify the right of children to express their
Student Reflection – School Councils
opinions on matters affecting them and have these seriously considered. Every government in
the world, including the UK, has ratified the Convention bar the USA and Somalia. Despite slow
progress, the UK has cemented this commitment in section 176 of the 2002 Education Act,
which places a responsibility on LEAs, governing bodies and schools “…to consider the views
of children and young people and involve them when making decisions” (quoted in Hannam,
2003: 43). This justification for the statutory right to participate in school life - that children have
a basic right to be heard - is very important, which, it should be noted, carries more weight than
arguments centred on participation’s relevance to Citizenship.
Additionally, it has been shown that as part of a wider complementary whole-school policy,
school councils can help reduce exclusions from school (Davies, 1998). By creating a school
climate conducive to inclusion and participation pupil behaviour can be improved. Fostering this
sense of ownership amongst pupils - that it is their school - has been identified as one of the
most beneficial outcomes achieved by school councils, which has wider advantageous effects
such as improved learning outcomes across the curriculum (Davies and Kirkpatrick, 2000; 82;
Hannam, 2003: 41).
The necessity of legislation
“It is clear that the UK is out of line with the rest of Europe in the question of democracy.
It has no legislation on pupil involvement or grievance procedures… and no system for
consulting pupils on educational policy.”
(Davies and Kirkpatrick, 2000: 7)
It is necessary at this juncture to pre-empt arguments that legislation requiring the compulsory
creation of school councils will not guarantee their effectiveness. While this may be true, a
cursory examination of the state of play of school councils in Britain illustrates the current
deficiencies of the voluntary approach. Many students are denied access to representation and
even where it exists many fail to participate. Looking at results from the first phase of the
Longitudinal Citizenship study it is evident a marked disparity exists between pupils’ opportunity
to participate in schools and their actual utilisation or take-up of this opportunity.6 This is
While 94 per cent of head-teachers polled in a representative sample of 200 schools claimed their school boasted some form of
school council or student representation, just under two-thirds (64 per cent) of students surveyed believed they had the opportunity
to be involved in the running of their school through student councils. Furthermore, only one-third (34 per cent) reported
participating in running a school council elections and only 10 per cent of students indicated they had actually been involved in a
school council. It was also found that just over one-quarter of students surveyed (27 per cent) agreed or strongly agreed that they
were often consulted in the development of school policies.
6
Student Reflection – School Councils
important for two reasons. Firstly, it suggests that the current non-legislated system is failing
and secondly because the reasons for this variation in take-up rates are likely to illuminate
characteristics of successful school councils, which can then be codified through statutory
measures and replicated at other schools. While it is not necessary to rehearse the qualities
common to effective school councils here,7 what is clear from the literature is that the most
successful are ones perceived by students to possess a high degree of autonomy and a real
capacity to implement change. This potential to bring about positive change is termed school
efficacy and essentially refers to students’ confidence in the effectiveness of their participation
in school life – the extent to which students believe their contribution or participation can make a
difference. This perception of efficacy is important as it may impact on whether students choose
to participate in school activities and is duly being investigated by the Longitudinal study. As the
authors explain:
“Developing this notion of school efficacy among young people through their school
experiences may be an important factor in their future civic and political behaviour”
(Kerr et al., 2003: 104)
For Citizenship education the implication is clear. If the rationale for school councils and
enhanced democracy in school is to ensure that young people develop a sense of agency or
efficacy then school councils must offer real capacity to implement change. Only this degree of
participation will nourish young people’s belief in their ability to improve their immediate
environment. Fostering this belief in their own efficacy at school is a fundamental prerequisite to
achieving the aim of an active citizenry armed with the knowledge, skills and values to
participate effectively in public life. Given this fact leaving student councils to individual school
initiatives of varying quality is clearly inadequate.
While some criticisms will apply to both a voluntary and compulsory system, for example the
differentiated learning outcomes of councillors and non-councillors, the benefits of a statutory
approach are considerable. A compulsory approach stipulating certain essential democratic
features is more likely to work than a haphazard arrangement varying from school to school.
Best practice can be used to inform the legislation so that the model to be adopted by schools
across the country is that most conducive to nurturing students’ sense of efficacy or agency. By
definition this implies autonomous democratic structures with the capacity to enact change. It is
here where the ‘Ladder of Participation’ model advocated by Roger Hart (1992) is expedient. It
7
For brief outlines see Taylor and Johnson, 2002: 121-125; Hannam, 2004: 40-42; and Davies, 1998: 31.
Student Reflection – School Councils
essentially performs the role of a barometer against which to measure or gauge the autonomy
of children when they participate in projects in the public domain. The model’s relevance here is
in its ability to inform strategies for implementing effective school councils that succeed in
engaging pupils.
Admittedly, studies have shown that even rigorous legislation guaranteeing democratic
structures in school needs to be combined with a number of other initiatives such as monitoring
and evaluation, adequate training for pupils and staff, extensive resources and a more
participatory pedagogy in the classroom (for more information see Davies and Kirkpatrick, 2000:
83-84). But legislation is still a necessary pre-requisite for all pupils to enjoy their right to an
effective and respected collective voice. Codifying a student’s right to be heard on matters
through legislation will omit a clear signal that children’s input is valued and is likely to result in
more effective structures being established. It is a fact recognised by many European countries
(see quote at top of this section) and should be accepted in the UK as well.
The wider picture
“The more successful [councils] are in motivating young people to become politically
literate, the less satisfactory young people are likely to find their lack of political rights.”
(Lockyer, 2003: 128)
Taking a wider perspective, if school councils and making schools more democratic is accepted
as being essential to achieving the broader aims of Citizenship education then it is appropriate
to explore other factors that may prevent these aims from being realised. The question we have
been discussing so far - whether participation can be encouraged in an hierarchical school
environment - is extremely important. However the more pertinent question is whether those
armed with knowledge of British society’s current political arrangements will want to engage in
that system? Will an informed and politically literate student (i.e. a student coming to the end of
their school life) not become conscious of their relative powerless and recognise the limitations
of our unresponsive democratic system characterised by unequal power relationships. To be
more specific, on a personal level will students (aged 16 plus) not notice the hypocrisy of their
political status in being encouraged to participate while being denied the franchise? On a
national level, will they not recognise the inadequacy of a completely non-proportional electoral
system, which results in so many votes, effectively people’s voices, being ignored? Will not the
convergence of political parties and the end of ideology this implies also become clear to
Student Reflection – School Councils
politically educated pupils? Where politicians were once sellers of dreams and harbingers of
social transformation they are now little more than administrators managing social crises.
Looking at the global picture, will Citizenship education, if successful, not make students
increasingly aware of the erosion of national sovereignty as governments across the world are
emasculated by transnational corporations guided by the logic of global capital?
I may paint a bleak picture but it serves an important point as it illustrates, without being
hyperbolic, what is at stake and therefore brings into stark relief how urgent it is to revive our
democratic structures. Given the current democratic deficit, it will be a slow and difficult
transformation of incremental changes. This makes developing a sense of efficacy in young
people while at school all the more important. The very nature of wider society means it is much
harder to ensure your voice is heard by those that wield power and therefore bring about
change. Precisely because of this children must leave school knowing that change is possible
and that their involvement or participation can make a difference. It is the only way to hope to
remedy the many failings of our current democratic settlement.
Conclusion
“Admittedly, one can take a horse to water and it may not drink. But unless water is provided
it cannot drink at all.”
(Crick, 2003: 18)
The case made in this paper has been that the renewal of British democracy through
Citizenship education as envisioned by the Crick Report, if it is to be achieved at all, is reliant
upon children gaining positive experiences of democracy. This suggests that schools should
pursue a policy of participation through the increasing involvement of pupils in decision-making
where
appropriate,
which
requires
the
development
of
pseudo-democratic
political
arrangements, such as school councils, accompanied by more inclusive school-wide protocols.
This represents the only viable strategy to foster a sense of efficacy in young people, which in
turn is essential for wider political revival. The Advisory Group’s decision to leave school
councils as an optional policy is therefore misguided. While legislation is no guarantor of
effective schools councils that engage pupils, it is a prerequisite. This is where the horse and
water allegory of Crick, which he articulated in support of Citizenship education in general being
a universal entitlement, is relevant. It applies equally well to school councils being made
compulsory.
Student Reflection – School Councils
However, a relatively sober analysis has been presented which recognises the limits of school
democracy and the difficulties associated with creating effective school councils. School
councils per se are not a universal remedy or panacea that will automatically fulfil the
participatory requirements of Citizenship education. But even if there are limits to the
responsibilities and power that can be given to pupils, that is a weak argument against
devolving the responsibilities that can be. When implemented with wider democratic changes
(including a participatory classroom pedagogy), school councils represent a paragon for active
citizenship. Allied with arguments propounding the fundamental right of children to have a say
on matters involving them, as enshrined in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, it is
clear that school councils and the collective voice this allows must be a statutory entitlement for
all children. To remedy the Crick Report’s omission then, school councils should be guaranteed
through legislation.
Bibliography

Clarke, F. (2000) ‘Democracy has to be lived to be learned’ Times Educational Supplement
20/10/00

Crick Report (1998) Education for Citizenship and the Teaching of Democracy in Schools,
Final report of the Advisory Group on Citizenship London: QCA

Crick, B. (1978) Political Education and Political Literacy London: Longman

Crick, B. (2000) Essays on Citizenship London: Continuum

Crick, B. (2003) ‘The English Citizenship Order 1999: Context, Content and Presuppositions’
in A. Lockyer, B. Crick & J. Annette (eds) Education for Democratic Citizenship: Issues of
Theory and Practice Aldershot: Ashgate

Cunningham, J. (2000) Democratic Practice in a Secondary School’ in A. Osler (ed)
Citizenship and Democracy in Schools London: Trentham

Davies, L. (1998) School Councils and Pupil Exclusions London: School Councils UK

Davies, L & Kirkpatrick, G (2000) The Euridem Project: A Review of Pupil Democracy in
Europe London: Children’s Rights Alliance for England

Entwistle, H. (1971) Political Education in a Democracy London: Routledge
Student Reflection – School Councils

Gearon, L. & Brown, M. (2003) ‘Active Participation in Citizenship’ in L. Gearon (ed)
Learning to Teach Citizenship in the Secondary School London: Routledge Farmer

Hannam, D. (2004) ‘Student Councils: Education for Democracy in English Secondary
Schools’ in B. Linsley & E. Rayment (eds) Beyond the Classroom: Exploring Active
citizenship in 11-16 Education London: New Politics Network

Harber, C (1987) Political Education in Britain London: Falmer

Harber, C. (1989) Political Education and Democratic Practice in C. Harber & R. Meighan
(eds) The Democratic School: Educational Management and the Practice of Democracy
Ticknall: Education Now

Hart, R. (1992) Children’s Participation: From Tokenism to Citizenship Florence: Unicef

Kerr, D. (1999) Re-examining Citizenship Education in England in J. Torney-Purta et al.
(eds) Civic Education Across Countries: Twenty-four National Case Studies from the IEA
Civic Education Project Amsterdam: IAEEA

Kerr, D. et al (2003) Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: First Cross Sectional Survey
2001-2002 National Foundation for Educational Research

Linsley, B. & Rayment, E. (2004) Preface in B. Linsley & E. Rayment (eds) Beyond the
Classroom: Exploring Active citizenship in 11-16 Education London: New Politics Network

Lockyer, A. (2003) ‘The Political Status of Children and Young People’ in A. Lockyer, B.
Crick & J. Annette (eds) Education for Democratic Citizenship: Issues of Theory and Practice
Aldershot: Ashgate

Polan, A. (1989) ‘School: The Inevitable Democracy’ in C. Harber & R. Meighan (eds) The
Democratic School: Educational Management and the Practice of Democracy Ticknall:
Education Now

Slater, D. (1997) Consumer Culture and Modernity Cambridge: Polity Press.
Taylor, M. & Johnson, R. (2002) School Councils: Their Role in Citizenship and Personal and
Social Education Slough: National Foundation for Educational Research