Introduction
The
essay would like to argue succinctly that indeed citizenship education has a
place in the primary school curriculum in Botswana as a part of the global
village and in any other part of the world. The paper will unfold with the discussion
of what citizenship entails, global perception of citizenship, merits
supporting the teaching of citizenship education and the backbreaking
challenges that educators face when teaching the concept.
Citizenship
From
the traditional Greek and Roman republics, citizenship has meant involvement in
public affairs by those who had the liberties of citizens. In modern times,
however, democratic ideas have led it to include human emancipation, elections
and transparent government processes (Crick, 1998). This goes on to prove that
citizenship has transformed over the years. According to Hammet and Staeheli
(2009) citizenship in abstract terms now includes ideals of the healthy,
active, productive and responsible citizen. It is thus imperative to mention
that the concept citizenship encompasses a range of complex themes; competency,
responsible and active community participation (Hall, Coffey & Williamson,
2010). In Starkey (2000) these themes may vary from one country to another
depending on their unique aspirations guided by history and the future of its
citizenry. For example, the British focus on creating a diverse society founded
on multicultural citizenship whilst the French aim at integrating individuals
into a predetermined and existing republican framework.
Citizenship education
Because
citizenship is an important concept to individuals, societies, countries and
the global world, it thus became logic that there be citizenship education
either formally or informally. Boadu (2013) highlight that “citizenship
education implies being educated to become an efficient member of one’s
immediate environment and the general human community, to develop a commitment
to work effectively with diverse people and to accept differences in cultures
and values” (p.138). Implicit in the above quote is the notion that citizenship
can be taught and learned. Kerr (1999) posit that citizenship education is
construed broadly to encompass the preparation of young people for their roles
and responsibilities as citizens and in particular, the role of education through
schooling, teaching and learning in that preparatory process (Magadu, 2012).
Further,
Boadu (2013) in his study on citizenship in Ghana allude that citizenship
education is a subject that aims at preparing competent, reflective, concerned
and participatory citizens who will contribute to the development of their
community and country in the spirit of patriotism and democracy.
The place of citizenship education in
the curriculum
The
place of citizenship education in the school curriculum has never been disputed
to a level where it can be scrapped off the curriculum as having failed
dismally at least according to the literature available to this essay and more
so that each society has a view of its ideal citizen. Thus, “the citizen of a
state should always be educated to suit the constitution of their state”, Aristotle
(as cited in, Davies, Evans & Reid, 2010). This being true, we must in
addition move towards preparing native citizens for global citizenship
precipitated by the continued growing interconnectedness of the world (Mhlauli,
2014).
Citizenship
education has a place in the curriculum especially for countries that have
traditionally been under the rule of others, colonization, as it is the case
with most African countries which were predominantly colonized by the
Europeans. There are also countries that have sought their autonomy from others
like Singapore did from Malaysia (Sim, 2005) and the Republic of Ireland from
the British (Smith, 2003). In view of the above historical events, citizenship
education is necessary to emancipate the indigenous people from colonial
hangover to being autonomous and sovereign. It is through the teaching of
citizenship education that the school curriculum can provide the knowledge,
skills, attitudes and dispositions that prepares them for self-rule, citizenship
participation and peace. This assertion is made on the grounds that in most
cases independence was not handed on a silver platter to all, some countries
had to persevere, persist, endeavor and fight due to disagreement between
themselves as the ruled and the ruler (Keller, 1995). Moreover, Farahani (2014)
postulate that today’s crisis, especially war, environmental pollution, terrorism
and nuclear proliferation are challenging the peace and security of the world.
Many of these crisis are consequently as a result of misunderstandings and lack
of familiarity of cultures with one another. Clearly these crisis are solvable
through citizenship education which further cement its place in the curriculum.
In short, David and Hellen (2002) assert that citizenship education is perhaps
needed more than ever to provide a sense of purpose, solidarity and guidance in
a fragmented and changing world.
As
in Botswana, England and Sweden, voter apathy among the youth is a concern. It
appears to the observers that contemporary politics in most societies
increasingly fail to capture the interest and attention of the young citizenry
who are skeptical of bogus politicians and party affiliation and are
increasingly unlikely to vote (Bennett, 2007; Mpabanga, 2000) an uncongenial
state of affairs which Kerr (1999) term “democratic deficit” that which can be
corrected through educating for citizenship by schools. Societal ills like
voter apathy in democratic societies obviously point to the notion that
citizenship education has a place in the curriculum. In addition, Bennett
(2007) highlight that it was in the midst and severity of youth voting decline
in Britain that prompted the government to
commission the Crick Report of (1998) which called for compulsory civics
education in secondary schools. Accordingly, citizenship education and the
teaching of democracy are important for both the school and life of the nation
that there must be statutory requirement for schools that it is part of the
entitlement of every child in Britain (Crick, 1998). Essentially, if
citizenship education is seen as valuable by well-established states in
international circles, then we as developing countries should borrow from their
policies. However, in borrowing, we should be wary of duplicating even the very
things that are not congruent and in tandem with our practices. Hence, policy
borrowing is a delicate process which should consider local values (Haplin
& Troyna, 2010).
A
lot of countries globally seem to moving towards democratic governance. This
global trend has seen the continued cooperation between individual countries,
regions, continentally and to a greater extent globally. Democratic practices
in most cases are guided by liberties for all humans. Freedom of movement is
one such right enjoyed by people and they have managed to travel and settle in
other parts of the world permanently assimilating into the cultural groups and
identities hitherto unknown to them. According to Banks (as citied in Banks,
2008) the cultural and group uniqueness become imperative in multicultural
democratic societies. As such students need to develop the knowledge, skills
and attitudes that will enable them to function well in a globalized community.
Hence, in addition, Banks (2001) reiterate that global citizens need a new kind
of citizenship education through multicultural citizenship education enabling
them to acquire a delicate balance between cultural, national and global
identification. Even though Banks advancement in part talks of
multiculturalism, which is not the focus of this essay, the bulk of his
pronouncement axis on citizenship education, which is discussed herein as
having an eternal place in the school curriculum.
Borrowing
from the (Crick Report of 1998; section 1. 5) in paraphrased words to further
bolster the need for citizenship education, it is stated that, the concept is
needed to change the political culture of a 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 with critical capabilities. If citizenship
education can aim for the above, then its presence and importance in the school
curriculum need not be overemphasized because the suggested outcome is the very
citizen we need in this global world, more than ever before.
If
indeed citizenship education should be an entitlement for every child as
insinuated by the Crick Report of 1998, then we should catch them young and
educate them henceforth about citizenship. As Smith (2003) emphasize there is
evidence to suggest that the foundations of a divided society begins at an
early age. So, not only is it important to include a thorough understanding of
citizenship education principles like human rights and appreciation of
diversity in the curriculum as a basis for strengthening a democratic culture,
it may also provide a base for national unity and diversity.
This
part of the essay has shown that citizenship education has a place in the
school curriculum because it can be a vehicle to ride on towards global peace,
change political landscapes, fostering democracy and liberating people of the
world. It is said that Botswana finds herself in a period of history when
social attitudes and values around the world are changing at an unprecedented
rate. In the future, the people of Botswana and elsewhere will need to adapt to
the challenge of the global society whilst retaining the positive aspects of
their cultural values that distinguish them from other countries (Presidential
Task Group, 1997). Thus, it is possible to achieve the above through
citizenship education in the school curriculum.
The challenges of teaching
citizenship education
Based
on the assumption that citizenship education has a place in the school
curriculum, schools are thus seen as the practice grounds for citizenship
development. However, the effectiveness of this obligation is still unclear
(Goboers, Geijsel, Admiraal & Dam, 2013) mainly because citizenship
education teachers are faced with a plethora of challenges which will be
discussed in greater detail below.
To
start with, misunderstandings often arise in the discussion of citizenship
education because the same language means different things to different people.
In short, there is no fixed answer or definition to the concept (David &
Hellen, 2002; Hall, Coffey & Williamson, 2010; Kerr & Cleaver, 2004).
Phrases such as “the educated citizen” or “responsible citizenship” often
touted as outcomes of citizenship education, operate as educational slogans in
that they are “systematically ambiguous” and often represent particular
political interest (Komisar & Mcclellan, 1961; Popkewitz, 1980 as cited in
Sears & Hughes, 1996). These misunderstandings crop up rhetorically in
research and debates but they are also relative to the classroom thus implying
that the teaching of the concept is cumbersome on the part of both educators
and learners who are the very people the curriculum targets.
Further
discussing the lack thereof a universally accepted agreement on what
citizenship education is and entails (David & Hellen, 2002) allude that
schools and teachers cannot be possibly expected to prepare young people for
adult life as citizens without a complete and agreed position and drift that citizenship education should come
from. To the classroom teacher, the absence of agreement gives rise to various
interpretations that may otherwise be correct or incongruent to reality. An
antithesis to this anomaly will be to have a globally accepted stance on the
issue by scholars and most importantly for education policy, curriculum and
society to ease up the burden on educators.
In
his Zimbabwean study on citizenship education challenges, Tshabangu (2006)
reveal that “schools are highly examination centered and tend to marginalize
non-examinable subjects” (p.56). It is worth noting that in some countries
citizenship education is taught as a separate subject whilst in some instances
it is infused into other curriculum subjects like social studies in the guise
of nation building. It must also be noted that, citizenship education tends to
be pushed to fore if it is infused into examinable subjects like social studies
in Botswana. On the other hand, when the subject is not examined like in Singapore
and Italy (Kerr, 1999) and in Britain at the advice of the Crick Report of 1998,
teachers’ consciously and unconsciously push it to the periphery and
concentrate more on examinable subjects. Paradoxically, the latter instance
given above defeats the overriding purpose of the social studies which is
citizenship education Barr, Barth and Shemis (as cited in Sim, 2005) as opposed
to the former.
A
different twist of events with regards to assessment crops in with Pike (2007)
insisting that his study has found out varied views on assessment of
citizenship education with the cohort that is against assessment stating that
it should not be introduced into this area because at the end of the day the
most important assessment is whether they do anything with what they learn upon
graduation and it is practically impossible to measure that in quantifiable
terms. This implies that those teaching citizenship education have a problem of
actually measuring if their efforts are bearing fruit or it is just a hopeless
pursuit (David & Hellen, 2002).
The
other challenge of teaching citizenship education as beheld by developing
countries especially in Africa is lack of Information and Technology for both
leaners and teachers to use. Good citizenship which we aspire for should be
preceded by teaching the young about local before international issues. What is
lacking and that which makes us fail to fit into the interconnected world
puzzle as individuals is lack of the international element seen or taught
effectively using information and technology. There is a need to involve
technology in the teaching of social studies (Department of Curriculum
Development & Evaluation, 2005), however, supporting technological
equipment is at an all-time low especially in remote areas. To counter this
global isolation created by lack of technology, Bennett (2007) lament that the
learning environment for citizenship education must be designed to appeal to
the affinity for networks and communities of interest. Online interactive
technology enable citizenship education learners to engage with and contribute
to the emerging understanding of public issues like democratic participation (Blevins,
LeCompte & Wells, 2014; Kerr, 1999; Semela, Bohl & Kleinknect, 2012).
This will positively help teachers to depart from the traditional textbook
based citizenship education which lacks the international element (Kerr, 1999).
Curriculum
developers in most countries under the supervision of politicians of the
incumbent governments develop citizenship education syllabi and content which
according to Bennett (2007) are based on highly conventional citizenship models
which center on the idea of the “dutiful citizen” (DC) as opposed to the
“self-Actualizing Citizen” (AC). The former is expected to learn the basic
government and political institutions, be informed about issues and make
responsible voting choices whereas the latter conversely sees his political
commitment and involvement highly personal and contributing to the personal
life, social recognition and esteem and friendship relations. Hence the
challenge for teachers then is offering a less meaningful and appealing citizenship
education
Compounding
the challenges inherent in teaching citizenship education like the AC and DC is
that, there are major tensions countries face in approaching citizenship
education namely; the extent to which it is possible to identify, agree and
articulate the values and dispositions which undergird citizenship. The tension
hinges on the answer to the simple question; is citizenship “value explicit” or
“value neutral”. The former promotes distinct values that are part of a broader
nationally accepted system of public values and beliefs like in Singapore and
Korea whilst the latter is concerned with a neutral stand on values and
controversial issues leaving the decision to the individual (Kerr, 1999).
Moreover, Mclaughlin (as cited in Kerr, 1999) brings up another challenging
debate about the balance between the “public” and “private” dimensions of
citizenship education. The assertion is such that the “public” is termed
“thick” implying citizenship education has a bigger role for education as
opposed to the notion of the “thin” meaning that citizenship education has a
lesser role to play. From a different perspective, these differences and
debates may appear outside the classroom issues, but it is imperative to state
in explicit terms that, lack of a clear drift which citizenship dimension to
take makes the teaching of the concept difficult for educators. The concquence
of which is citizenship education gets a lower status, low priority and a less
appealing area to learners just like social studies as a school subject housing
citizenship education (Dube, 2009).
It
is unfortunate that learners of citizenship education in primary schools in
Ghana and Malawi have a low level of literacy and as such have difficulties in
reading and understanding curriculum materials like textbooks (Boadu, 2013).
This problem is not only experienced by Malawians and Ghanaians, a similar
problem where content, concepts and terminology was incomprehensible to
learners was revealed in Botswana (Dube & Moffat, 2009). Even though their
study had Cultural Studies as a lower primary school subject as its centrality,
it is still relevant to this discussion taking cognizance of the fact that
culture is also a facet of citizenship education. Teachers of citizenship
education thus find themselves in a tight corner with their backs against the
wall and resort to lecturing or code switching when teaching.
Pedagogically
there also appear to be a challenge as Davaies, Evans & Reid (2010)
emphatically state “although national citizenship itself is so old to be almost
outdated, citizenship education is a new area. As such it does not yet have a
tradition or pedagogy of its own” (p.83). The accusation of citizenship
education as a new concept and not having a tradition is a discussion for
another day, what excites this essay in outlining the challenges of teaching
the concept is the lack of an established pedagogy because obviously educators
find themselves in trial and error situations where methods of teaching may
actually bring different results in different settings.
The
other challenge which incorporate the issue of pedagogy is that, in Botswana
like in many other countries, there is no specific initial and in-service
training for teachers on citizenship education. Majority of teachers’ are
trained in closely related subjects like geography, religious education and
social studies (Kerr, 1999; Starkey, 2000). This presages a situation whereby
innocent recipients of education are left at the mercy of generalist educators
as opposed to the preferred specialists. The poor generalists unescapably teach
concepts that they are not competent and confident in (Robbins, Francis &
Elliot, 2001) complicated by insufficient pedagogical and content knowledge
which are critical to teaching and the cadre (Turner-Bisset, 1999). To make up
for lack thereof training, Mhlauli (2011) suggest that a study and evaluation
of teacher education programs is eminent to find out if mega trends of global
citizenship education are incorporated therein. In addition to restructuring
pre-service training of teachers, there is need to boost in-service training of
practicing teachers in the field which is already patchy (Crick, 1998; Ersoy, 2010;
Hillburn & Maguth, 2014; Kerr, 1999; Mhlauli, 2011).
It
is crystal clear that citizenship education educators are not having it easy as
implementing agents on the ground. They face a superfluity of challenges like
insufficient training, shortage of support technological material, political
influence and ambiguity of concepts and dimensions.
Conclusion
This
essay has shown that citizenship education which is what social studies
purports to do, is concerned with equipping citizens with the knowledge,
skills, attitude, values and dispositions needed to survive in their native
communities and within the interconnected global world. Citizenship education
clearly has an eternal place in the school curriculum because countries will
eternally have citizens from all parts of the world with different cultures and
identities, the need for people to live in peace, unity and diversity shall
never cease. Despite all the ululation accorded citizenship education, its’
teaching and learning has however been marred by challenges which educators
grapple with daily including but not limited to ambiguity, politics,
insufficient training cultural differences locally and globally.
References
Banks,
J. A. (2001). Citizenship education and diversity: Implication for teacher
education. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(1), 5-16. DOI:
10.1177/0022487101052001002
Banks,
J. A. (2008). Diversity, group identity and citizenship education in a global
age. Education Research, 37(3), 129-139. DOI: 10.3102/001318317501
Bennett,
L. W. (2007). Civic learning in changing
democracies: Challenges for citizenship education
and Civic Education. London. Routledge.
Blevins,
B., LeCompte, K. & Wells, S. (2014). Citizenship education goes digital. The Journal of Social Studies Research, 38, 33-44.
Boadu,
K. (2013). Teachers’ perceptions on the importance of teaching citizenship
education to primary school children in
Cape Coast, Ghana. Journal of Arts and
Humanities, 2(2), 137- 147.
Crick,
B. (1998). Education for citizenship and
the teaching of democratic skills: Final Report of the Advisory Group on Citizenship. London.
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA).
David,
S. & Hellen, L. (2002). Citizenship
and the curriculum. International perspectives on curriculum studies. Greenwood Publishing Group. EBook,
1530-5465. ISBN13: 01780313011870
Davies,
I., Evans, M. & Reid, A. (2010). Globalizing citizenship education: A
critique of “global education”
and “citizenship education”. British
Journal of Educational Studies, 53(1), 66- 89.
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-85272005.00248.x
Dube,
O. (2009). Addressing controversial issues through social studies: Making
social studies come alive.
European Journal of Educational Studies,
1(1), 25-34.
Dube,
O. & Moffat, P. (2009). The Teaching and Learning of Cultural Studies at
Lower School Level in Botswana. Journal of Education and Human Development,
3 (1), 1-12.
Ersoy,
A. F. (2010). Teacher candidates’ views on the controversial issues
incorporated into their courses
in Turkey. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 26, 323-334.
Farahani,
M. F. (2014). Role of global citizenship education in world peace and security. Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 116, 934-938. DOI: 10.1016/jsbspro.2014.01.323
Geboers,
E., Geijsel, F., Admiraal, W. & Dam, G. (2013). Review of the effects of
citizenship education. Educational Research Review, 9, 158-173.
Hall,
T., Coffey, A. & Wiliamson, H. (2010). Self, space and place: Youth
identities and citizenship. British Journal of Sociology of Education,
20(4), 501-513. DOI: 10.1080/014259699995236
Haplin,
D. & Troyna, B. (2010). Processes of policy borrowing in education: Some explanatory
and analytical devices. Comparative Education, 39(4), 451-461.
DOI: 10.1080/0305006032000162020
Hammet,
D. & Staeheli, L. A. (2009). Citizenship
education in South Africa: A report to schools. University of Witwatersrand.
Hillburn,
J. & Maguth, B. M. (2014). Spatial citizenship education: Civics teachers’
instructional priorities
and approaches. Journal of Social Studies
Research. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016
Keller,
E. J. (1995. Decolonization, independence and the failure of politics in
Africa. Martin, P. & O’meara, P.
(Eds.). Bloomington. Indiana University.
Kerr,
D. (1999). Citizenship education: An international
comparison. National Foundation for Educational
Research (NFER). Retrieved from http://nationalarchives.gov.uk
Kerr,
D. & Cleaver, E. (2004). Citizenship
education longitudinal study: Literature review- citizenship education one year on-What does it mean?
Emerging definitions and approaches
in the first year of national curriculum citizenship in England. National Foundation for Research in England.
Magadu,
S. (2012). Citizenship education in Zimbabwe: Challenges and prospects. Journal of Educational
and Instructional Studies in the World, 2(4), 179-181.
Mhlauli,
M. B. (2014). Teaching World Mindedness in Social Studies Classrooms in Primary
Schools in Botswana: Reality or
Illusion? International Research in
Education, 2(1), 51-72.
Mhlauli,
M. B. (2011). Understanding the social studies teachers’ experiences:
Conceptions of citizenship education
in Botswana. International Journal of
Scientific Research in Education,
4(3&4), 165-180.
Mpabanga,
D. (2000). Declining voter participation in Botswana. Trends and patterns. Botswana Journal
African studies, 14(1), 47-58.
Pike,
M. A. (2007). The state and citizenship education in England: A curriculum for
subjects or citizens? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 39(4),
471-489. DOI: 10.1080/0220270701230370
Presidential Task Group for a Long Term Vision for
Botswana. (1997). Long term vision for Botswana. Gaborone, Botswana:
Government Printer.
Robbinson,
M., Francis, L. J. & Elliot, E. (2001). Attitudes towards education for
global citizenship among trainee
teachers. Research in Education. No.
64.
Sears,
A. M. & Hughes, A. S. (1996). Citizenship education and current educational
reform. Canadian Journal of Education, 21(2), 123-142.
Semela,
T., Bohl, T. & Kleinknect, M. (2012). Civic education in Ethopian schools:
Adopted paradigms, instructional
technology and democratic citizenship in a multicultural context. International Journal of Education and Development, 33, 156-164.
Sim,
B. (2005). Citizenship education and social studies in Singapore: A national
agenda. International Journal of Citizenship and
Teacher Education, 1(1), 58-69.
Smith,
A. (2003). Citizenship education in Northern Ireland: Beyond national identity. Cambridge Journal
of Education, 33(1), 15-31.
Starkey,
H. (2000). Citizenship education in France and Britain; Evolving theories and
practices. The Curriculum Journal, 11(1), 39-54.
Tshabangu,
I. P. (2006). Student participation and responsible citizenship in a
non-polyarchy: An evaluation
of challenges facing Zimbabwe’s schools. International
Education Journal, 7(1), 56-65.
Turner-Bisset,
D. (1999). The knowledge bases of the expert teacher. British Education Research Journal,
25(1), 39-55.
