National CPD Distance Learning Programme 2010
© Citizenship Foundation and Birkbeck, University of London
Unit 2b QCDA Big Picture and the nature of National Curriculum
Citizenship
Citizenship as a central aim of the curriculum
As we have noted, education for citizenship has always been a concern of
mass public education, however that may have been expressed. The new
curriculum introduced in 2007, declared that
The curriculum should enable all young people to become:



successful learners who enjoy learning, make progress and
achieve
confident individuals who are able to live safe, healthy and
fulfilling lives
responsible citizens who make a positive contribution to
society.
The definition of responsible citizenship offered here at the introductory
section is worth examining because of its wide ranging nature, at times
embracing what has sometimes been called ‘Preparation for Adult Life’,
going beyond the narrower definition of citizenship as participation in public
life.
On this view, responsible citizens are those who:










are well prepared for life and work
are enterprising
are able to work cooperatively with others
respect others and act with integrity
understand their own and others’ cultures and traditions, within the
context of British heritage, and have a strong sense of their own place
in the world
appreciate the benefits of diversity
challenge injustice, are committed to human rights and strive to live
peaceably with others
sustain and improve the environment, locally and globally
take account of the needs of present and future generations in the
choices they make
can change things for the better.
Critics of this set of descriptors might wonder where the overtly political
elements of citizenship have gone. There is an interesting focus on character
1
National CPD Distance Learning Programme 2010
© Citizenship Foundation and Birkbeck, University of London
and personal values here rather than knowledge and understanding (which is
set out in the subject description). If this list is compared with the ‘Overview
of essential elements to be reached by the end of compulsory schooling’ in the
Crick Report (AGC 1998, p44) it most closely resembles the Values and
Dispositions column. Implicit in this list, but certainly not explicit, is a
definition of citizens as people who understand their rights and
responsibilities, respect the rule of law and support the democratic processes.
Having said that, there is nothing here which is not broadly in line with the
more detailed description of citizenship education given in the programme of
study. The citizen, as outlined here, respects other people irrespective of
ethnicity, gender, disability, sexual orientation, is committed to making the
world a better place and living peaceably with others – which would imply
support for democratic processes rather than bringing out change through
violence means. Current concerns about responsibility for the environment
are also prominently spelt out.
Critics of Citizenship Education sometimes argue that it is intended to
promote compliance rather than criticality and sometimes the language of the
National Curriculum documents, taken at face value, certainly seems to
suggest a slightly conservative (with a small c) approach. Are the cynics
right in claiming that citizenship education is more about social control than
empowerment? In their study of teachers in 64 primary and 11 secondary
schools, Davies et al (1999) found that many teachers identified good citizens
as:
individuals who have a high level of concern for the welfare of others, who
conduct themselves in a strong moral and ethical manner, who participate in
the community where they live. They characteristically bring to their
dealings with others both tolerance of others’ opinions and views and an
acceptance of diversity within society. [p 44]
The teachers, when asked to give an example of good citizenship, commonly
suggested that:
a good citizen picks up litter, seeing a crisp packet and putting it in the
dustbin is a quality of a good citizen.
In a recent study undertaken in a Birmingham primary school, John Lloyd
(2006) found that a similar understanding was widespread amongst the
pupils. Are schools and teachers widely transmitting this view to their
students? The Citizenship Coordinator in Lloyd’s study told him that
citizenship:
...is essential to ethos. It is an indirect way and a discreet way of
manipulating children’s behaviour... it’s manipulation of behaviour in
a structured way.
2
National CPD Distance Learning Programme 2010
© Citizenship Foundation and Birkbeck, University of London
Our own view would be that such a conception of the responsible citizen is
fine as far as it goes, but that it does not go far enough insofar as the citizen, out
of a personal sense of moral responsibility, should be capable of acting in
ways critical of the status quo. If citizenship is conceived as merely caring for
the welfare of others in the private domain, or acting only at the interpersonal level, then the whole concept becomes depoliticised and neutered.
Happily, there are enough elements in the QCDA big picture definition of the
responsible citizen to refute the charge of educating for subjecthood rather
than citizenship.
Nonetheless, the language of political action is not prominent in the
definition. Would it be possible to speculate that those drafting the National
Curriculum documents were reluctant to allow the curriculum framework to
be read as promoting a radical, left-of-centre curriculum? We have already
noted that the introduction of citizenship education (including education for
political literacy) was a highly political act requiring the support of all
sectors of society and that Crick took a cautious line to minimise opposition.
We may here be seeing something of a continuation of that approach. Having
said that, the responsible citizen described above is one who ‘challenges
injustice’ and there should be nothing quiescent or passive about this.
One possibly unfortunate result of the framing of ‘responsible citizens’ in the
very broad way we have here, is that the blurring of the distinction between
citizenship education and other aspects of preparation for adult life (e.g. the
world of work and careers) continues, as it has done for many years in
English schools. It was one of the clear ambitions of the Crick Report to
hammer home that PSHE as practised in schools during the 1980s and 1990s
with its emphasis on the personal rather than the public, must not be
regarded as providing an adequate education for democracy and active
citizenship. Citizenship education is not the same as preparation for adult life.
Citizenship as outlined in the Programmes of Study
A glance at the Programme of Study for citizenship offers a much more
sharply focused view of what it means to education for citizenship:
Education for Citizenship equips young people with the knowledge, skills
and understanding to play an effective role in public life. [...] Pupils learn
about their rights, responsibilities, duties and freedoms and about laws,
justice and democracy. The importance of Citizenship, Programme of Study KS3
and KS4 (QCA, 2007)
3
National CPD Distance Learning Programme 2010
© Citizenship Foundation and Birkbeck, University of London
The importance statement embraces knowledge and understanding but also,
critically, includes certain key attitudes and values and assumes that the
natural outcome of the citizenship learning will be some form of community
engagement. This community engagement will also provide further contexts
for students to develop the skills of citizenship. Students:
...learn to take part in decision-making and different forms of action. They
play an active role in the life of their schools, neighbourhoods, communities
and wider society as active and global citizens.
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.
It must be remembered that, in one sense, this can be seen as a form of social
control – the curriculum can be seen here as an instrument used by the state
to induct young people into an acceptance of British multiculturalism and the
kind of tolerant rights-based society which accepts the rights of individuals
to pursue a variety of lifestyles. These values are, of course, problematic for
some citizens and so there are tensions here. Privately, citizens have freedom
of belief and may object to whatever they please, but publicly, citizens are
required to practice tolerance, even of lifestyles they object to, and that must
be the basic requirement of a society based on rights, equality and the rule of
law.
The controversial nature of the content of citizenship education is
acknowledged in the importance statement and in the body of the
programme of study. Citizenship:
helps young people to develop their critical skills, consider a wide
range of political, social, ethical and moral problems and explore
opinions and ideas other than their own. They evaluate information,
make informed judgements and reflect on the consequences of their
actions now and in the future. They learn to argue a case on behalf of
others as well as themselves and speak out on issues of concern.
This section of the importance statement usefully fleshes out some aspects of
what it means to be a responsible citizen. Action in the public domain should
be exercised with informed understanding and ideally, citizens should be able
to at least understand ‘where other people are coming from’ when they
engage in democratic debate. This is not only an important attribute
contributing to respect for others’ viewpoints but, in practice, those who
understand how other people think and feel are generally more effective
when in comes to developing persuasive arguments and making rounded
decisions in the interests of the common good.
4
National CPD Distance Learning Programme 2010
© Citizenship Foundation and Birkbeck, University of London
In this way, the Crick vision of citizenship education as having three strands,
social and moral responsibility, community involvement and political
literacy, has indeed come to be implemented in the structure of National
Curriculum citizenship.
Study Tasks


As we have seen, citizenship education is now regarded as one of the
three central purposes of our National Curriculum. To what extent do you
think this is reflected in the way citizenship education is currently being
promoted, supported and developed nationally? For example, there is no
agreed National Strategy for Citizenship which has been introduced as a
brand new subject, and the training of citizenship specialists through the
PGCE programme is too low ever to achieve one in every school. What
might explain this apparent mismatch?
Some people fear that the dominant intention of citizenship education is
to create citizens passively subject to the law and thus CE would become
little more than a form of social control. To what extent would you agree
with this? What connotations does the term ‘responsible’ have for you in
this context?
References
Advisory Group on Citizenship (1998) Education for Citizenship and the
teaching of democracy in schools. London, Qualifications and Curriculum
Authority.
QCA, (2007) National Curriculum Citizenship, Key Stage 3 and Key Stage 4. London,
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority [accessed online]
Lloyd, J.R. (2006) Social Empowerment or Social Control: an exploration of pupils’ prior
knowledge of citizenship, and its application to appropriate teaching and learning in a
junior school. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Birmingham.
Davies, I., Gregory, I., and Riley, S.C. (1999) Good Citizenship and Educational
Provision. London, Falmer.
5
National CPD Distance Learning Programme 2010
© Citizenship Foundation and Birkbeck, University of London
6