The place of citizenship education in the primary school curriculum in Botswana

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.