8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
1/26
CANADIANJOURNALOFEDUCATION29,2(2006):410435
EDUCATINGFORCITIZENSHIP:WHATTEACHERSSAYANDWHATTEACHERSDO
MarkEvans
TeacherscharacterizationsofcitizenshipeducationpedagogyinCanadaandEngland
wereexploredinthisstudy.Preferredlearninggoalsreflectedliberal/civicrepublican
tendencies represented in contemporary conceptions of citizenship education.
Preferredpedagogicalpractices exposed an array of teachingmethods, assessment
approaches, and classroom environment considerations. Eclectic and distinctivetendencieswerenoted in relation to thegoalsgivenpriority andpracticesused to
facilitatestudentlearning.Thesetendenciescutacrossvariouscurricularperspectives
(e.g. transmission, transactional, and transformational),privileging (andneglecting)
certain curricular learning goals and signaling a level of ambiguitybetween what
teacherssayandwhatteachersdo.
Keywords:citizenshipeducation,pedagogy,curriculumperspectives,instruction
Cetarticleporte sur lesdfinitionsquedonnent lesenseignantsde lducation la
citoyennet au Canada et en Angleterre. Les objectifs dapprentissage privilgis
refltent les tendances librales ou rpublicaines reprsentesdans les conceptions
actuellesdelducationlacitoyennet.Parmilespratiquespdagogiquesprfres
figure tout un ventail demthodes denseignement et dvaluation ainsi que de
considrationsayanttraitlaclasse.Lauteurfaittatdetendancesclectiquesetbien
dfiniesenlienaveclesbutsauxquelsondonneprioritetlesmthodesutilisespour
faciliter lapprentissage. Ces tendances relventdediversesprmisses fondant les
programmes(axes,parexemple,surlatransmissionoulatransformation,ouencore
de type transactionnel), qui ngligent ou privilgient certains objectifs
dapprentissage etqui tmoignentdunhautniveaudambigut entre ceque les
enseignantsdisentetcequelesenseignantsfont.
Mots cls: ducation la citoyennet, pdagogie, approches des programmes,
enseignement.
_________________
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
2/26
EDUCATINGFORCITIZENSHIP 411
Interest in citizenship education has escalated worldwide in the last
decade. Some view this dimension of education as an opportunity to
prepareyoungpeople tounderstandandbecome involved in thecivic
lifeoftheircommunity(ies),fromthelocaltotheglobal.Othersviewitas
a way to respond to a range of existing social and civic concerns.
Whateverthereason(s),therehasbeenaproliferationofresearchstudies,
formaldiscussions,and curriculum initiatives throughout theworldas
teachers, policymakers, and researchers attempt to understand and
assess the complex processes by which young people learn about
democraticcitizenship.
THESTUDY
Thisstudy,beguninspring2001,wascompletedinspring2004.Broadlystated, the study illuminated how a sample of specialist secondary
school teacherscharacterizedcitizenshipeducationpedagogy informal
secondaryschoolcurriculumcourses/programsinOntarioandEngland.
The following question framed the study: Inwhatways do specialist
secondary school teachers characterize educating for citizenship and
why?Subsidiaryquestions included:What learninggoalsdo specialist
secondaryschool teachersprefer tonurture in formalsecondaryschool
curriculum courses/programs when educating for citizenship? What
preferredpedagogicalpracticesdo these teachers communicate and/or
exhibit in formal secondary school curriculum courses/programs to
achieve
these
goals?
And,
why
do
these
teachers
advocate
these
goals
andpracticeswheneducatingforcitizenship?
RATIONALE
The study was prompted by ongoing discussion about citizenship
educationslocationandrepresentationinschoolcurriculaandconcerns
raised by researchers about a general lack of empirical research on
citizenship education pedagogy (Davies, 2000; Edwards & Fogelman,
2000; Hbert & Sears, 2001; Kerr, 2003; Kerr, Cleaver, Ireland, &
Blenkinsop,2003;Sears,Clark,&Hughes,1999).Usefulstudies thatdo
existhavetendedtoconsiderdistinctaspectsofpedagogy(Avery,1997;
Bickmore,1992;Evans&Saxe,1996;Merrifield,1998;Pike&Selby,2000).
Studiesthatconsiderteacherscharacterizationsofcitizenshipeducation
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
3/26
412 MARKEVANSpedagogy more broadly are rare and only a few national and
internationalstudiesareavailable toprovideguidance (e.g.,Councilof
Ministers ofEducation,Canada, 2001;Davies,Gregory,&Riley, 1999;
Hahn, 1998;Kerr,Cleaver, Ireland,& Blenkinsop, 2003; TorneyPurta,
Schwille&Amadeo,1999).Thesestudies,whilehelpful,tendtoportray
whatDavies(2000)referstoasaconfusingandconfusedsituation(p.
93). Each draws attention to the rather limited research base for
citizenshipeducationpedagogyandacertainlackofclarityaboutwhat
isbeingpractisedinthenameofcitizenshipeducationinclassroomsand
schoolsinbothcountries.
Interestinthisfocuswasfurtherpromptedbyagrowingrecognition
amongeducationresearchersthatwhatteachersknowanddoisoneof
the most important influences on what students learn (DarlingHammond,1998,p.6).Researchonpedagogyhassuggestedtheneedfor
a more sophisticated conceptual understanding of pedagogy that
connectstechnicalcompetencieswithdifferentkindsofknowledgebases
and contextual circumstances (Cole & Knowles, 2000;Joyce, Weil, &
Calhoun, 2000; Marzano, 2003; Mortimore, 1999; TurnerBisset, 2001).
Similarly, comparativists (Alexander, 1999; Broadfoot, 2004; Crossley,
2002)havevoicedconcernsaboutthegenerallackofempiricalresearch
onpedagogyand identifiedpedagogyasan importantandsubstantive
researchdirection.Alexander (1999), for example,has commented that
comparativists have largely ignored school and classroom processes
andhave
tended
to
concentrate
on
national
systems
and
policies
and
thatthisimbalanceneedstobecorrectedandthatpedagogyoughtto
beacentralfocusforeducationalresearch(p.109).
Reasons for choosing to undertake this study in Canada and in
Englandwereprimarilyacademicandprofessional,butalsopragmatic.
Canada and England, with shared traditions and challenges, and a
similar educational focus on citizenship education, provided rich
researchcontexts to informboth the theoreticalandpracticalaspectsof
pedagogy in this curriculum area. Existing versions of citizenship
education in both contexts were sufficiently similar to allow for an
interestingandvalidexplorationofresponses tocommon issuesand it
was anticipated that a comparative orientationwould offer important
insightsintothiseducationalundertaking.
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
4/26
EDUCATINGFORCITIZENSHIP 413
REVIEWOFTHELITERATURE
Initially, contemporary characterizations of citizenship education in
Canada and England were reviewed with attention to three broad
themes: conceptual perspectives, policy directions, and pedagogical
practices. This review distinguished among different notions of and
approaches to citizenship education and revealed some of the central
issuesunderpinningthisareaofinquiry.ConceptualPerspectives
Contemporaryconceptionsofcitizenshipeducationreflectacertainlevel
of ambiguity. Dominant views of citizenshipthe civic republican
(responsibilitiesbased) and the liberal (rightsbased)offer varied
understandingsaboutwhat itmeans toeducateforcitizenship(Heater,
2000)whileotherperspectives (e.g., communitarian, socialdemocratic,
multiculturalist,postnational) furthercomplicate thesituation (Davies,
1999; Ichilov, 1998; Kymlicka, 1995; Sears, 1996; Shafir, 1998).
Nevertheless, these perspectives provide conceptual guidance and
indicate the contradictions inherent in terms of conceptual
understanding (e.g., individualist vs. collectivist, political rights vs.
socialrights,localvs.global).
In Canada, for example, Sears, Clarke, and Hughes (1999) argue
therehasnotbeenasingleconceptionofdemocraticcitizenshipthathas
formed thebasis for civic educationbut rather differing conceptions
whichexistalongacontinuumfromelitisttoactivist(p.124).Osborne(2001,p. 4243)puts forward thenotion that education fordemocratic
citizenship shouldmeetwhathedescribes as the twelveCs (e.g., a
focus on the cosmopolitan nature of the world as a whole, thinking
criticallyandcreatively,andbecoming informedand involved inones
communities, locally, nationally, and globally). StrongBoag (1996)
forefrontspluralistandinclusivedimensionsofcitizenshipandlaments
thatavarietyofgroups(e.g.,feminists,FirstNationspeoples,working
class groups) in Canada have largely been ignored in conversations
aboutcitizenshipineducation.
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
5/26
414 MARKEVANSInEngland,varyingconceptionshavebeenexplored.Somescholars
have emphasized knowledge about government structures and
processes while others have included notions of identity, cultural
diversity, and political literacy (Lister, 1998; Osler, 2000; Ross, 2001).
Bousted andDavies (1996), for example, offer fourmodels ofpolitical
learning: citizenship education, cultural studies, global education, and
political literacy. Heater (1990, 2000) refers to a globally relevant
frameworkthatencouragesconsiderationofauniversalexpressionof
the citizenship principle and respects diverse historical traditions and
contexts. Heaters (1990) Cube of Citizenship includes three
dimensions: elements, location, and education. McLaughlin (1992)
identifies a way of understanding the concept of educating for
citizenship that takes into consideration its complex and contestednaturewithinthecontextofadiverse,pluralistic,democraticsociety.In
particular, he points to the challenge that societies face in seeking to
balanceelementsofsocialandculturaldiversitywiththoseofcohesion,
anaspirationwhichinvokes(amongother things)afamiliardistinction
betweenpublicandprivatevaluesanddomains(p.37).
Policydirections
Both Canada and England have developed official curriculum for
citizenshipeducation.AlthoughCanadahasnonationalcurriculum,all
provinces and territories have some form of citizenship education in
their
elementary
and
secondary
curricula.
A
recent
study
of
educational
policy across Canada, Education for Peace, Human Rights, Democracy,
International Understanding and Tolerance (Council of Ministers of
Education, Canada, 2001) outlines variances in citizenship education
curriculaacrossCanadabutalsosuggestsacommontrend:ashiftfrom
traditional conceptions of citizenship education to goals and practices
that forefront its transformativeandglobalcharacter.The reportof the
Committee forEffectiveCanadianCitizenship, EducatingCanadas 21st
Century Citizens: Crisis and Challenge (1994), Celebration Canadas
Components of Citizenship Education: InitiatingAction (1998), and more
recently,thereformofcurriculainvariousprovincesacrossCanadaare
illustrativeofthisshiftingvision.InOntario,forexample,thereleaseof
theOntarioMinistryofEducationandTrainingsSocialStudies,Grades1
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
6/26
EDUCATINGFORCITIZENSHIP 415
6; History and Geography, Grades 7 and 8 (1998), Canadian and World
Studies,Grades9and10andCanadianandWorldStudies,Grades11and12
(OntarioMinistryofEducationandTraining,1999,2000),andtheOntario
Secondary Schools Grades 9 to 12, Program and Diploma Requirements
(OntarioMinistryofEducationandTraining,1999)signaledarenewed
emphasisoneducatingforcitizenship.Inaddition,acompulsorygrade
10Civics(1999)coursewasintroducedasarequirementforgraduation
that highlighted informed, purposeful, and active strands of
citizenship.
InterestineducatingforcitizenshipescalatedinEnglandduringthe
1990s.Citizenshipeducation,accordingtoKerr,hasbeenattheheart
of amajordebate and policy review concerning itspurpose, location,
andpracticeinschoolsandcollegesoverthelastdecade(Kerr,Cleaver,Ireland, & Blenkinsop, 2003, p. 2). The introduction of citizenship
education as a nonstatutory, crosscurricular theme with the
establishment of theNationalCurriculum (1988); the establishment of
the Citizenship Foundation in London (1989); the report Encouraging
Citizenshipof theSpeakersNationalCommissiononCitizenship(1990);
andinvolvementinmajorstudiesliketheInternationalAssociationforthe
Evaluation ofEducationalAchievement (IEA)CivicEducation Study (1994,
1999) are illustrative of this escalating attention. The work of the
AdvisoryGrouponCitizenship (TheCrickReport, 1998),Educationfor
CitizenshipandtheTeachingofDemocracyinSchoolsledtothesubsequent
announcement
by
the
Department
for
Education
and
Employment/Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (DFEE/QCA
1999) that citizenship be a statutory component of the National
Curriculum, and signifiedwhatKerr (2000) referred to as anhistoric
shift in educational policy in this area (p. 73). The CitizenshipOrder
(DFEE/QCA, 1999), which created citizenship education as a new
foundationsubjectforpupils11to16,fromSeptember2002,alsobecame
partofanonstatutoryframeworkalongsidePersonal,SocialandHealth
Education (PSHE) forpupils5 to11 fromSeptember2000,builton the
Advisory Groups recommendations. The new statutory Citizenship
Order set out the anticipated learning outcomes along three broad
dimensions:knowledgeandunderstanding,developingskillsofenquiry
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
7/26
416 MARKEVANSand communication, and developing skills of participation and
responsibleaction.
Pedagogicalpractices
Reforms tocitizenshipeducationcurriculaacrossCanadaandEngland
sparked increased attention to pedagogical practice. In Canada,
educatorshavebeenexploringclassroomandschoolbasedpedagogical
approaches that accommodate the complex learning goals associated
withcitizenshipeducation(Evans&Hundey,2000;Osborne,1997;Pike
& Selby, 2000; Sears, 2004). Various websites, texts, and resource
materials(e.g.UNICEFCanadasGlobalSchoolhouse;CIDAsYouthZone;
Evans, Slodovonik, Zoric, & Evans text Citizenship: Issues andAction
[2000];andClassroomConnections,Cultivating aCulture ofPeace in the21st Century [2002]) have been developed and provide an array of
classroom applications. Initiativeswith a strongpedagogical emphasis
likeCasesCriticalChallengesAcross theCurriculumseries, theCanadian
InternationalDevelopmentAgencys (CIDA)GlobalClassroom Initiative,
and the Library of Parliaments Teachers Institute on Parliamentary
Democracy provide helpful ideas for analysing and designing effective
citizenship education pedagogy. Case analysis, public issue research
projects, model town councils, peacebuilding programs, community
participationactivities,public informationexhibits,online international
linkages,andyouthforumsmakeupthetypesofclassroomandschool
wide
activities
being
encouraged.
England has also experienced a flurry ofpedagogical interest and
activity.TheCitizenshipFoundation,forexample,hasdevelopedarange
of activitybased teaching ideas and source materials that havebeen
piloted in schools (Huddleston & Rowe, 2001; Supple, 2000; Thorpe,
2001, 2005). The Centre for Citizenship Studies in Education at the
UniversityofLeicesterdevelopedarangeofcurricularandpedagogical
materials to support teacherswork in schools.The newly established
Association for Citizenship Teaching (ACT) provides professional
supportanditsjournal,TeachingCitizenship,reviewsandreportscurrent
developments in citizenship education pedagogy. In addition, various
texts, resource materials, and support websites (e.g., The Hansard
Societys resources onparliamentarydemocracy,OXFAMsCoolPlanet
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
8/26
EDUCATINGFORCITIZENSHIP 417
website, theBritishYouthCouncilspeereducationandyouthcouncils
materials,andThe Institute forCitizenshipsActivateSeries)havebeen
developed,reflectingsignificantpedagogicalworkunderway.Avariety
of professional learning activities have been initiated to encourage
professional development. The establishment of the citizED network
(Citizenship Education, funded by the Teacher Training Agency), in
particular,isnoteworthyinthisregard.
RESEARCHORIENTATION
Aqualitativeorientationguidedthestudysdesignandimplementation.
A comparative dimension was infused to bring into focus teachers
contrasting perspectives and practices. Nonprobability, purposive
sampling was used. Specialist teachers were selected on thebasis ofspecificcriteriarelatedtotheirabilitytoprovidethemostvaluabledata,
giventhespecificpurposesofthestudy.Thesecriteriaincludedagood
workingknowledgeofsecondarycurriculumandcitizenshipeducation
curriculumintheirrespectivearea(e.g.,KeyStages3and4inEngland,
Grades912 inOntario);evidenceofsubstantiveandeffective teaching
experience;variedviewsaboutthepurposesandpracticesofcitizenship
education; and evidence of ongoing professional development and
curriculumleadership.
Data were collected through a variety of research methods and
sources. Twentytwo specialist secondary school teachers from across
England
and
twenty
two
specialist
secondary
school
teachers
from
Canada (Ontario) were identified and invited to complete a
questionnaire.Thirtythreewerereturned,seventeenfromtheCanadian
teachersandsixteenfromtheEnglishteachers.Threeteacherswerethen
selectedfromschoolsintheCanadiansampleandthreefromschoolsin
England (Yorkshire) for further investigation. A minimum of five
interviewsandfourclassroomobservationswasundertakenwitheachof
these selected teachers. Interviews were taped and transcribed. Each
interview infused ablend of the standardized, openended interview
and interview guide approaches. Questions were openended but
constantprobeswereusedtopursueparticulartopicsandissuesraised
bytheinterviewer.Observationnoteswererecorded.Duringvisitstothe
schools,pertinentcurriculumdocuments (e.g.,schoolbasedcurriculum
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
9/26
418 MARKEVANSdocuments)were reviewed. Relevant contextual information inwhich
theresearchwasconductedwasalsoconsidered.
FINDINGSANDDISCUSSION
Analysisofdatafocusedprimarilyonthecentralquestionofthestudy:
In what ways do specialist secondary school teachers characterize
educating forcitizenshipandwhy? Particularattentionwasgiven to
teachers characterizations of preferred learning goals, pedagogical
practices,andfactors thatappeared to inform theirgoalsandpractices.
Lastly, these characterizations were analyzed in terms of broader
theoreticalcurriculumperspectives.
LearningGoals
Questionnaire and interview data suggested that preferred learning
goals of teachers in both countries extended well beyond more
traditionalcivicsperspectivesandwerereflectiveofcertain liberal/civic
republicantendenciesrepresentedinmanycontemporaryconceptionsof
citizenship education and in the core learning strands expressed in
related,officialcurricula.Dataalso revealed that teachers talkedabout
their preferred learning goals in four general areas: knowledge
acquisition and being informed about civic issues; developing skills
requiredofcitizenship;exploringdiversebeliefs,values,andnotionsof
socialjustice;andbecominginvolvedinciviclife.
Teachersemphasizedknowledgeacquisition(e.g.,anunderstanding
ofcoreconceptslikerightsandduties,civicinvolvement,andonbeing
informedabout issues related tocivic life)asacentralgoal.Variations
existedinrelationtocoreconceptsandpublicissuestobegivenpriority,
thetimeframe(historicalandcontemporary),contextualemphases(from
thelocaltotheglobal),andissuesofdepthandbreadth.Respondentsin
the English group, for example, tended to put a slightly stronger
emphasisononesdutiesandlegalresponsibilitiesratherthanonones
rights. Skill developmentwas also viewed as a central goal. Teachers
identified aspects of thinking, enquiry, and collaboration as important
skill areas to nurture. They placed less emphasis on skill sets often
associated with civic literacy (e.g., negotiating, mediating conflict).
Variationsexistedinrelationtoskillstobegivenpriority(e.g.,academic
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
10/26
EDUCATINGFORCITIZENSHIP 419
understanding, social critique).Canadian teachers, for example, talked
about a breadth of skills, whereas teachers in the English sample
encouragedagreateremphasisondepthofunderstandingand critical
thinkingskills.
Most teachersexpressedgoals toexplorediversebeliefsandvalues
underpinning civicdecisionsand to introducenotionsof socialjustice.
Variations existed,however, in relation to thevalues focus (e.g.,value
dilemmas,diverseculturalvalues),notionsofjustice(e.g.,moral,legal),
and perspectives of a good citizen. Canadian teachers, for example,
tended to focus onbeliefs and values related to a culturally diverse
milieu,whereasEnglishteachersdirectedmoreattentiontootherforms
of diversity such as social class. Teachers in this sample also viewed
involvementincivic lifeasanimportantlearninggoal.Variationswereapparent in relation to the nature and extent of involvement (e.g.,
service, political action), the purposes of involvement (learning about
changethroughservice,bringingaboutchangethroughaction),andthe
types of issues to be addressed (e.g., from the local to the global).
Respondentsinbothcountriesemphasized learningaboutparticipation
through service learning. A few Canadian respondents, however,
advocated for amore activist intent. Interestingly,voting as a form of
politicalinvolvementreceivedlittleattention.Teachersacrossthesample
sawclassroomsandschoolsasprincipalsitesforpractisingparticipation
although they also encouraged participating in civic life beyond the
classroom.
PedagogicalPractices
Questionnaire,interview,andobservationaldatasuggestedthatteachers
tendtotranslatetheirlearninggoalsintopedagogicalpracticesthrough
ways inwhich they shape their classroom environments, use discrete
and performancebased instructional practices, and approach
assessment.Pedagogicalpractices,eitherreportedorobserved,appeared
tobeexpressedpredominantly in theclassroomcontextand therewas
littleevidenceofschoolwideand/orcommunitybasedpractices taking
place. Ontario teachers tended to talk about educating for citizenship
largely through the compulsory grade10Civics course or through its
infusion in other parts of the History or Social Science curriculum,
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
11/26
420 MARKEVANSwhereas English respondents tended to talk about educating for
citizenship through various subject areas as well,but mostly in Key
Stage3History,ReligiousEducation,andPSHEcourses.
Shaping the classroom environment.Preferredpracticesused toshape
the classroom learning environment tended to take on the following
forms:practices that nurtured conditions for student involvement and
inclusion; the use of classroom space to facilitate an awareness of
citizenshipthemesandissues;selectiveresourceaccessandsupport;and
teachermodeling democratic practices.Again, variationwas apparent
across theentiresampleandbetweennationalsamples.Approximately
onethirdoftheCanadianrespondentsandaboutonehalfoftheEnglish
teachers indicated nurturing conditions for student involvement and
inclusion in the classroom. Activities included student input intoclassroom decisions and rules and expectations, seating plans that
encouraged more open discussion, voting on certain issues, student
choice onprojects, or encouragingpupilvoice through student school
councils. English teachers, for example, discussed the classroom as a
contexttoencouragemultipleperspectivesondifferenthistoricalthemes
and issues and stressed the importance of teacher direction and
authority.Canadianteachers,incontrast,tendedtodiscussopportunities
forstudentinputintosuchthingsasclassroomrulesandexpectations.
Approximately twothirdsof the teachersacross the sample talked
abouthow theyusedclassroomspace tonurtureasenseofcitizenship
learning.Comments
from
Canadian
respondents
included
using
walls
to
display studentswork, highlighting onbulletinboards current issues
from magazines and daily newspapers, and organizing desks in
particularways to facilitatediscussion.Teachers in theEnglish sample
discussed theuse of classroom space to a lesser extent.Visits to their
classrooms,however, revealedmoreattention to thispractice thanone
mighthave anticipated from thequestionnairedata.Data sources also
revealed that most classroom environments included a range ofnewspapers, textbooks, magazine articles, and videos to support
knowledgeacquisitionandskilldevelopment.Textbooks,inmanycases,
informed the course framework and provided core information.
Newspaperarticlesandvideos,inparticular,wereviewedasimportant
sources of information to complement texts, to provide information
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
12/26
EDUCATINGFORCITIZENSHIP 421
about contemporary issues, and to support skill development (e.g.,
readingforthemainidea).Mostresourceswereselectedandorganized
by teachers for students. A small number of teachers identified
community resources (e.g.,politicalpartiespamphlets,NGO literature,
guest speakers) as important sources of information; there was little
mentionoftheuseofInformationandCommunicationTechnology(ICT)
orCDROMs.Ininstanceswhereprojectsweremorestudentdirected,a
wideruseofcommunityresourcesandInternetwasapparent.Veryfew
discussedtheuseofnonmainstreamresourcesupport.
Instructionalpractices.Teachersmadeuseofanarrayofdiscreteandperformancebased instructional practices when educating for
citizenship.Discreteactivities(e.g.,aquestioningsequenceonrightsand
responsibilities, amindmap on the concept ofdemocracy)weremostevidentand tended tofocusonaspecific learninggoal.BothCanadian
and English teachers acknowledged the use of performancebased
strategies (e.g., radio interview on the concept of human rights,
simulationof localgovernmentdecisionmaking)butevidenceof these
strategieswaslessnoticeableinpractice.Therewasasenseamongstthe
respondents that these typesofpractices,aspedagogical theoristshave
suggested (Bennett & Rolheiser, 2001; Joyce & Weil, 2000; Marzano,
2003),wouldassiststudents to learnknowledge,skills,andbeliefsand
valuesinmoreintegratedways.
All teachers emphasised instructional practices that aimed to
increasestudent
knowledge.
Both
groups
outlined
teacher
directed
activities used to encourage content acquisition, conceptual
understanding, and an awareness of current events. In most cases,
information was largely transmitted from the teacher to the student
throughdifferentmediums.Teachershighlightedthemessuchasrights
and responsibilities, democratic processes, forms of political
participation, and current events,whereas they gave less attention to
themes often found in traditional Civics courses (e.g., structures of
government, constitutional matters). Data revealed varying emphases
among teachers in relation to concepts and/or issues forefronted,
temporalandcontextual considerations,and therelative importanceof
depth and/or breadth of understanding. The majority of teachers
reported having students read engaging excerpts from newspapers or
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
13/26
422 MARKEVANSviewTVnews forpertinentcontent.Manyalso referred to teacherled,
chalkandtalk discussions.Only a few teachers discussed approaches
that were more studentdirected. There appeared to be stronger
tendenciesacross theCanadiansample toencourageanunderstanding
ofcontemporary issuesandglobal themes,whereas theEnglishsample
appeared to place a stronger emphasis on deeper conceptual
understandingandhistoricalthemes.
Teachers also identified and exhibited a number of instructional
practicesthatencouragedthedevelopmentofthinkingandenquiryskills
related to aspects of civic life. Again, they identified rather discrete
activities todevelopspecificskillsorcombinationsofskills.Theyused
discreteteachingactivitiestodevelopcollaborativeskills,buttoalesser
extent. In most cases, smallgroup activities appeared to focus onknowledge acquisition and sharing information rather than the
development of particular collaborative skills. In a few instances,
teachers used more sophisticated cooperative learning structures to
nurture social skills and support community building. They also
acknowledged using more complex instructional strategies such as
enquirybased research assignments or issuebased investigations to
supportnotonly thedevelopmentof foundationalknowledgebutalso
the development of skills related to analysis and enquiry. Varying
emphases,bothacrossthesampleandbetweennationalgroupings,were
noted.Canadianteachers,forexample,tendedtoputanemphasisonthe
useof
cooperative
learning
structures
to
develop
social
skills,
whereas
Englishteacherstendedtofocusmoreondevelopingstudentsthinking
skills,perhapssuggestingamoreacademicemphasis.
FewerthanhalftheteachersfromeitherCanadaorEnglandreported
using instructional practices to encourage students to explorebeliefs,
values,and/ornotionsofsocialjusticeunderpinningcivicdecisionsand
actions. Teachers who did provide examples of practices in this area
tended tohighlightpractices that theyused toexplorepersonalbeliefs
andvalues throughhistoricaland contemporary themesand issues. In
most instances, variation was evident. Moral dilemmas, sample
scenarios, cooperative learning structures, circle activity, and case
studiesreflected theeclecticrangeofpracticesused.Teachingpractices
identified among the Canadian respondents tended to infuse a
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
14/26
EDUCATINGFORCITIZENSHIP 423
considerable emphasis on cultural diversity,whereas English teachers
tended toconsidervaluedilemmaswithinabroadersocialcontext.For
example,ReligiousEducationteachersinEnglanddiscussedpracticesin
thisdimensionmuchmorethanotherteachersacrosstheentiresample.
In commentsaboutnotionsof socialjustice, some teachershighlighted
moralcodeswhileotherstalkedmoreaboutlegalcodes(e.g.,Charterof
Rights). Observations of classes revealed even less attention to
instructional practices that explored beliefs and values underpinning
aspectsofciviclifeorthatnurturedunderstandingsofsocialjustice.Mostteachersreportedusinganassortmentofinstructionalpractices
tonurtureanawarenessofinvolvementinciviclifeandtendedtoview
theclassroomasthemostimportantlocationforstudentstolearnabout
andpractiseparticipation.Teachers tended to talkaboutstrategies thatallowed students to investigate and analyze how citizens and groups
participateindecisionmakingaroundcurrentcivicandhistoricalissues
and events. Inpractice,however, these strategieswere lessprominent
than those discrete activities and strategies used to emphasize
knowledge acquisition and skill development. Some teachers did
indicate that their schools had introduced citizenship education
initiativesattheschoollevel,butthatmostoftheemphasiscontinuedto
be subjectbased and mostly within the classroom context. Real
involvement in civic affairs beyond the classroom, a key feature of
citizenshipeducationcurricula inbothcontexts,waseven lessevident.
Thosefew
teachers
in
the
Canadian
sample
who
went
beyond
the
classroom tended to emphasize involvement that ranged from service
contributions topolitical action.Respondents fromEngland tended to
highlight the value of community volunteerism and charity work as
preferredemphasesforencouragingparticipation incivic life.Teachers
didnotappeartobeopposedtoestablishingschoolwideorcommunity
based initiatives,but rather,during implementation, teachersappeared
to implicitly reject certain goalsbecause they viewed them as simply
unmanageableintheircurrentcircumstances.
Approaches to assessment. In the questionnaire and interviewdata,teachers articulated a preference for two main types of assessment:
paperandpencil short answer/essay answer and performancebased
types of assessment. They most often cited paperandpencil short
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
15/26
424 MARKEVANSanswer(e.g.,multiplechoicetests,fillintheblanktests,truefalsetests)
and essay answer types (e.g., analytical paragraphs, short essays) of
assessment.Theyvaluedpaperandpencil typesofassessmentbecause
theyperceivedthesetypestoprovideusefuldataaboutstudentlearning
in twocentral learninggoalareas introducedearlier, theacquisitionof
knowledgeand thedevelopmentofskills.Ananalysisofactualpaper
andpencilpracticesrevealedprimaryattentiontoknowledgeandskills
strandsof learning,withmuch lessattention to thebeliefs,values,and
notionsofsocialjusticeandparticipationstrands.Teachersuseofthese
practices tended to occurwithin the context of specific courses taught
and their focus tended to reflect contextspecific curriculum policy
requirements.Thereappeared tobe increasingattention to,anduseof,
performancebasedtypesofassessment(e.g.,criteriabasedratingscales,assessment rubrics) to complement paperandpencil assessments,
suggestingagrowingattentiontothemoreinteractiveandparticipatory
learninggoals.Teachersbelieved that these types of assessment could
captureabroaderrangeoflearninggoalsinanintegratedmanner(e.g.,
participatory criteria in combination with other learning goal areas).
Theygavelimitedattentiontotypesofassessmentthatencouragedself
reflection or showed evidence of ongoing personal learning (e.g., self
assessment,reflectivejournals,portfolios).
Thisheightenedemphasisonknowledgeacquisitionandbasicskills,
although somewhat incongruous with stated learning goals, was not
surprisingif
one
considers
teachers
assessment
practices
more
generally.Literature suggests that teachers tend to rely onpaperand
pencil forms of assessment to assess knowledge acquisition andbasic
skilldevelopment and rarelymovebeyond these learningdimensions,
evenwhenofficiallearninggoalsaremorebroadlystatedandintended
(Earl & Cousins, 1996; Linn & Gronlund, 2000). This situation is,
however, problematic if one considers the broader learning goals
associated with citizenship education. There appears tobe an urgent
needtodevelopeffectiveassessmentapproachesthatalignmoredirectly
with the broader learning goals associated with this curricula area
(Jerome,2004:Kerr,2002;Myers,2004;Osborne,2001).
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
16/26
EDUCATINGFORCITIZENSHIP 425
FactorsRelatingtoPreferredLearningGoalsandPedagogicalPractices
Findings tended to confirm recent research that suggests that teachers
preferred learning goals and pedagogical practices, in general, are
informedandguidedbyavarietyofoverlappingfactors,orwhatCole
andKnowles (2000)havereferred toasavarietyofwaysofpersonal,
professional, and contextual knowing (p. 7). (See too Darling
Hammond,1998;Mortimore,1999;Shulman,1987;TurnerBisset,2001).
Teachers across the sample identified a mixture of factors that they
believed related to their preferred learning goals and pedagogical
practices,albeitwithvariantlevelsofunderstandingandemphasis.Five
main factors (in no particular order) were identified: personal
understandings of citizenship education, personal background
experiences, learnercharacteristics,viewsof teachingandlearning,and
contextualfactors.
Certainfactorsappearedtobemoreevidentinrelationtopreferred
learninggoals or areas ofpedagogicalpractice among teachers in this
study. Teachers emphasized learner characteristics, teachers personal
views of teaching and learning, and schoolbased contextual
circumstancesascore factors relating to theirpreferences forparticular
instructionalpractices.Suchnotionsasactivelearning,enquiry,positive
reinforcement,highstandards,andinclusionmadeuptherathereclectic
range of core ideas underpinning teachers preferences for particular
instructional practices. Contextual factors related to the school (e.g.,
schoolethos,statusofcitizenshipeducation,qualifiedteachers)receivedconsiderable attention. Personal experiences (e.g., immigrant
background,professionallearningexperiences)wereevidentbutinvery
discrete and respondentspecificways. Interestingly, therewas limited
reference to understandings of citizenship as a significant factor in
determiningonesinstructionalpractices.Understandingsofcitizenship
tended to more strongly relate to what learning goals teachers
highlighted rather than thepedagogicalpractices theyused to achieve
thesegoals.Overall,dataappearedtoprovidearatheruncertainsenseof
the relationshipbetween factors and preferred pedagogical practices.
Certain combinations of factorsweremade explicitwhile otherswere
lessevident.Determiningadirectrelationshipbetweenthesefactorsand
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
17/26
426 MARKEVANSteacherspreferredgoals andpracticeswasnotpossible from thedata
collected.
TeachersCharacterizationsandCurriculumPerspectives
Acrossthesample,teacherspreferredlearninggoalstendedtoforefront
ablend of transmission, transactional, and transformative curriculum
perspectives. Attention to the cognitive dimension of learning was
particularly prominent among these broad tendencies, confirming
findingsfromearlierstudies(CouncilofMinisters,Canada,2001;Davies,
Gregory, & Riley, 1999; Kerr, Cleaver, Ireland, & Blenkinsop, 2003).
Within this dimension, teachers appeared to give preference to goals
related to knowledge acquisition, understandings of contemporary
and/orhistorical issues, and thedevelopmentof thinking and enquiryskills. They also encouraged goals that promoted understandings of
diverse beliefs and values, notions of social justice, and civic
involvement, suggesting teacher support for (at least in their stated
goals) the broader learning mandate of contemporary notions of
citizenshipeducation.
Teacherspreferredpedagogicalpracticesacross thesample,on the
other hand, reflected a more narrowly defined set of curriculum
tendencies and tended to support recent findings in phase 1 of the
Citizenship Longitudinal Study (Kerr, Cleaver, Ireland,& Blenkinsop,
2003), that teacherled approaches to citizenshiprelated topics were
predominant
in
the
classroom,
with
more
participatory,
active
approachesmuch less commonlyused (p. 48).Data sources revealed
that teachers practices reflected a strongerblend of transmission and
transactional tendencies. They highlighted practices that encouraged
academic understanding and the development of thinking skills.
Practices that encouraged understandings of identity and diversity,
formsofcivicinvolvement,orskillsofsocialcritiquewerelessnoticeable
thanwhatmayhavebeen anticipated from teachers statedgoals sets.
Assessment practices, in particular, suggested a further deepening of
transmissionorientedtendencies,revealingfurtherlevelsofincongruity
withstatedlearninggoals.Transformativetendencieswerenotably less
evidentinpractice.
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
18/26
EDUCATINGFORCITIZENSHIP 427
Teachers personal orientationswereboth distinctive and eclectic.
Most teacherspersonalorientationsappeared toforefront transmission
andtransactionaltendencieswhileafewteacherspersonalorientations
suggested a stronger transactional and transformative mixture. One
teacherspractice, forexample, tended toalignmoreprominentlywith
thetransmissionperspective,albeitwithstrongtransactionaltendencies.
His learning goals and pedagogical practices fostered knowledge
acquisition and the development of thinking and enquiry skills that
enabled students to fit intoandbecontributingmembersof their local
communities.Another teachers goals and practices appeared tomore
evenlyblend transmission and transactional tendencies. Herpersonal
orientation emphasized knowledge acquisition and academic
understandingbutalsothedevelopmentofcriticalthinkingandenquiryskills. Sheencouragedanunderstandingofdiversebeliefsandvalues,
and notions of justice, through the study of historical human value
dilemmasand issues.A third teachersgoalsandpracticesappeared to
infuse a stronger blend of transmission, transactional, and
transformative tendencies. In her pedagogical practices, she gave
distinctly more attention to learning strategies to promote
understandings of issues, skills, and values necessary to critique and
improvesociety.
Ablendofcurriculumperspectivesappearedtounderpinthearray
ofgoals andpractices that teachers communicated and exhibitedboth
acrossrespondents
responses
and
within
personal
responses,
confirming curriculum theorists observations that pedagogy is often
nestedwithinmore thanonecurriculumperspectiveandrarelyneutral
(Kelly,2004;Miller,1996;Miller&Seller,1985;Pratt,1994;Ross,2000).
Dominanttendencieswereapparentasweredisjunctionsbothacrossthe
sampleandwithinpersonalorientations.Transmissionandtransactional
curriculum tendencieswere clearly forefronted, suggesting that certain
learninggoalswerebeingprivileged,whileotherswerebeinggivenless
attention or simplybeing ignored.Assessmentpractices, inparticular,
mostlyreflectedknowledgeacquisitionandtheapplicationofcognitive
skillapplications.Underscoring thesepracticeswere twovariantviews
of learning:one thatappeared toviewknowledgeas largely fixedand
anotherthatviewedknowledgeassomethingthatisconstantlychanging
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
19/26
428 MARKEVANSandcanbemanipulated.
CONCLUDINGREFLECTIONS
Fivebroadpropositions areofferedbelow as concluding reflections to
illuminate understandings of educating for citizenship as expressed
throughthissampleofteachers.
LearningGoals:Breadth,Depth,andAmbiguity
Teachers characterizations of learning goals captured thebreadth of
intentrepresentedincontemporaryconceptionsofcitizenshipeducation
and core strands of the respective policy contexts. Variation existed,
however, in terms of the goals given priority and depth provided,
suggestingambiguityandraisingquestionsaboutwhattypesoflearningstudentsmightexperienceandwhattypesmightbesilencedorignored.
Participationinciviclife,forexample,widelyassertedincontemporary
conceptions of citizenship education, and clearly expressed in policy
documents as a core dimension of citizenship education,was largely
neglected in practice. The breadth of understanding revealed in the
commentsthatteachersmadedidnotleadthemtoquestionthespecific
omissionsormorelimitedcharacterizationsintheirpractice.
LearningGoals,PedagogicalPractices,andtheIssueofCongruency
Examples of incongruity between rhetoric (what teachers say) and
practice(what teachersdo)wereevident inthedata.Thisgeneral issue
canbegivenmore specificity in relation to twokey areas of teachers
practice. First, teachers communicated less about those practices in
which they emphasized beliefs, values, and notions of socialjustice
and participation in civic life.Second, teachers assessmentpractices
forefrontedknowledgeanda limited rangeofskills. Inbothexamples,
incongruitiesbetweenstatedgoalsandpreferredpracticesmaybeseen
asproblematic. It isdifficult to ascertainwhy thiswas the case,but it
appeared that there were at least, a few possible explanations. One
possibleexplanationisthatthebreadthoflearninggoalsissobroadthat
teacherssimplymakechoicestocovercertainelementsofthecurriculum
in ways that are workable for the daytoday classroom realities.
Whatever the reason, itwas clear thatcertaincore learninggoalswere
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
20/26
EDUCATINGFORCITIZENSHIP 429
not being addressed through teachers communicated or exhibited
pedagogicalpractices.
AnUncertainGapbetweenTheoryandPractice
Teacherscharacterizededucatingforcitizenship inavarietyofways,
reflecting varying levels of theoretical and practical sophistication.
Instructional practices ranged from specific and discrete activities to
reasonablyintricateinteractiveandperformancebasedstrategies.Paper
andpencil, shortanswerandessayanswerassessment,and toa lesser
extent, performancebased assessment, were the preferred assessment
approaches.And,theyusedavarietyofpracticestoshapeaspectsofthe
classroom learning environment, to facilitate student learning, and in
some cases, to infuse certain democratic principles. Interestingly, thenaming of theoretical pedagogical frameworks was indeed rare in
teachers explanations of their pedagogical preferences. Although it
wouldbeprobablyunrealistictoexpectteacherstoreferdirectlytothese
frameworks, itdoes suggest anuncertaingap thatmaynotbehelpful
betweenwhatcouldbroadlybereferredtoastheoryandpractice.
RelatedFactorsMatter
Avarietyoffactors,withvariedlevelsofemphasis,appearedtorelateto
teacherspreferredgoalsandpractices.Datadidnotsuggest,however,
anydirect linkages.Oneaspectof teachersworkmightbe considered
here.Teachersworkininstitutionswherethestatedgoalsandethosmay
conflictwiththeexpectedgoalsandpractices.Schools,organizationally,
havetendedtoreinforcenormsofhierarchicalcontrol,andindoingso,
have undermined curricular reform that encourages democratic
citizenship. This is not to suggest that this study has uncovered this
particular contradiction but rather to reaffirm that teachers act in
complexwaysandthatthiscomplexityperhapscanbeexplainedatleast
in partby the tensions they have to dealwith each day. If one is to
understandpedagogy in itsmostcomprehensiveform,oneneeds tobe
mindfulofthecomplexandoverlappingfactorsthatappeartorelateto
onespedagogy.
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
21/26
430 MARKEVANSDominantTendenciesandDisjunctions
Teachers personal orientations tended to reveal both eclectic and
distinctive tendencies that cut across various curricular theoretical
perspectives. Across the sample, two distinctive, and overlapping,
orientationstendedtobeforefronted,albeitwithsomedisjunctionsfrom
the dominant tendency: a dominant and blended transmission/
transactional orientation; and to a much lesser extent, a blended
transactional/transformative orientation.Thesepreferred and exhibited
orientationssuggestaprivilegingofcertaincurricularlearninggoalsand
policycontext.Curriculumtheoristsobservationsthatpedagogyisoften
nested within more than one curriculum perspective and is rarely
neutralwereapparent.Inparticular,transformativetendencieswereless
evidentinpractice.
Hopefullythesefindingswillbeabletoaddresssomeofthegapsin
ourtacitunderstandingofteacherscharacterizationsofwhatitmeanto
educate for citizenship. My concluding reflections in this section
thereforearenotanythingveryspecific thatwouldsuggest that Ihave
discoveredawayforwardbutratherthatattentionneedstobegiventoa
more deeply integrated conceptualization of citizenship education
pedagogy if thegoal is tonurturedemocraticcitizenship inclassrooms
andschoolcommunities.
REFERENCES
Alexander,R. (1999).Comparing classrooms and schools. InR.Alexander,P.Broadfoot,&D.Phillips(Eds.),Learningfromcomparing:Newdirectionsin
comparative international research: Volume 1. Contexts, classrooms, and
outcomes(pp.109112).Wallingford,Oxford:SymposiumBooks.
Avery,P.(1997).Thefutureofpoliticalparticipationinciviceducation.Minneapolis,
MN:SocialScienceEducationConsortium.
Bennett,B.,&Rolheiser,C.(2001).Beyondmonet:Theartfulscienceofinstructional
integration.Toronto:Bookation.
Bickmore, K. (1992). Learning inclusion/Inclusion in learning: Citizenship
educationforapluralisticsociety.TheoryandResearchinSocialEducation,
XXI(4),341384.
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
22/26
EDUCATINGFORCITIZENSHIP 431
Broadfoot, P. (2004) Lies, damned lies and statistics!: Three fallacies of
comparativemethodology(Editorial). ComparativeEducation,40(1),36.
Bousted,M.,&Davies, I. (1996). Teachers perceptions ofmodels of political
learning.Curriculum,17(1),1223.
Cole,A.,&Knowles,G.(2000).Researchingteaching:Exploringteacherdevelopment
throughreflexiveInquiry.Toronto:AllynandBacon.
Council of Ministers of Education, Canada. (2001). Educationforpeace, human
rights,democracy, internationalunderstanding, and tolerance.Published in
collaborationwiththeCanadianCommissionforUNESCO.
Crossley, M. (2002). Comparative and international education: Contemporary
challenges,reconceptualisation andnewdirectionsforthefield.Current
Issues
in
Comparative
Education,
4(2).
Retrieved
on
November
18,
2005,
fromwww.tc.columbia.edu/cice/Archives/4.2/42crossley.pdf
DarlingHammond,L.(1998).Teachersandteaching:Testinghypothesesfroma
NationalCommissionReport.EducationalResearcher,27(1),515.
Davies, I. (1999).What has happened in the teaching of politics in schools in
England during the last three decades, and why? Oxford Review of
Education,25(1/2),125140.
Davies,I.(2000).Implementingcitizenshipeducation:Canitbedone?TheSchool
Field,XI(3/4),91110.
Davies,I.,Gregory,I.,&Riley,S.(1999).Goodcitizenshipandeducationalprovision.
London,UK:FalmerPress.
Earl,L.,&Cousins,B. (1996).Classroom assessment:Changing theface,facing the
change.Toronto:OntarioTeachersFederation(OPSTF).
EdwardsJ.,&Fogelman,K.(2000).Citizenshipeducationandculturaldiversity.
In M. Leicester & C. Modgil (Eds), Politics, education and citizenship:
Education,cultureandvalues,Volume6,(pp.93103).London,UK:Falmer
Press.
Evans, M., & Hundey, I. (2000). Educating for citizenship in Canada: New
meanings in a changing world. In T. Goldstein & D. Selby (Eds),
Weaving connections: Educatingforpeace, social and environmentaljustice
(pp.120145).Toronto:SumachPress.
Evans, R., & Saxe, D. W. (Eds). (1996). Handbook on teaching social issues.
Washington,DC:NationalCouncilfortheSocialStudies.
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
23/26
432 MARKEVANSHahn,C.(1998).Becomingpolitical:Comparativeperspectivesoncitizenshipeducation.
Albany,NY:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress.
Heater,D.(1990).Citizenship:Thecivicidealinworldhistory,politics,andeducation.
London,UK:Longman.
Heater,D.(2000).Whatiscitizenship?Cambridge,UK:PolityPress.
Hbert,Y. (2002).Citizenship in transformation inCanada.Toronto:Universityof
TorontoPress.
Hbert,Y.,&Sears,A. (2001)Citizenshipeducation. RetrievedonJanuary16,
2006,fromwww.ceaace.ca/media/en/Citizenship_Education.pdf
Huddleston, T.,&Rowe,D. (2001).Good thinking: Educationfor citizenship and
moral responsibility. Volume 1, 2, 3: Citizenship Foundation. London,
UK:EvansBrothers.
Ichilov,O.(1998).Patternsofcitizenshipinachangingworld.InO.Ichilov(Ed.),
Citizenship and citizenship education in a changing world (pp. 1127).
London,UK:TheWoburnPress.
Jerome, L. (2004). Assessing citizenship education. CITIZED Student Teacher
Briefing,DRAFT1.
Joyce,B.,&Weil,M.withCalhoun,E.(2000).Modelsofteaching(6thed.).Boston:
AllynandBacon.
Kelly,A.V.(2004).Thecurriculum:Theoryandpractice(5thed.).London,UK:Sage
Publications.
Kerr,D.(2000,April).Citizenshipeducation:Aninternational comparisonacross16countries.PaperpresentedattheAnnualconferenceoftheAmerican
EducationalResearchAssociation, NewOrleans,USA.
Kerr, D. (2002, July). Assessment and evaluation in citizenship education,
NFER/DfES National Foundation For Educational Research. Paper
presentedatBritishCouncilSeminarinBeijingChina.
Kerr,D.(2003).CitizenshipeducationinEngland:Themakingofanewsubject.
Onlinejournal forSocialScienceEducation.Retrieved onFebruary 22,
2006,fromwww.sowionline.de/journal/2003 2/england_kerr.htm
Kerr,D.,Cleaver,E., Ireland,E.,&BlenkinsopS. (2003).Citizenship educational
longitudinal studyfirst crosssectional survey 20012002 (ResearchReport
416fortheDepartmentforEducationandSkills).London,UK:DfES.
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
24/26
EDUCATINGFORCITIZENSHIP 433
Kymlicka,W.(1995).Multiculturalcitizenship. InG.Shafir(Ed.),Thecitizenship
debates(pp.167188).Minneapolis, MN:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.
Linn,R,&Gronlund,N.(2000).Measurementandassessmentonteaching,(8thed.).
Columbus,OH:Merrill.
Lister, I. (1998).Citizenshipandcitizenshipeducation inBritain. InO. Ichilov
(Ed.),Citizenship and citizenship education in a changingworld (pp. 254
266).London,UK:TheWoburnPress.
Marzano,R.(1992).Dimensionsoflearning.Alexandria,VA:ASCD.
Marzano, R .J. (2003). Classroom Instruction that works: Translating research into
action.Alexandria,VA:ASCDPublications.
McLaughlin,T.H.(1992).Citizenship,diversityandeducation:Aphilosophical
perspective.JournalofMoralEducation,21(3),235247.
Merryfield,M.(1998).Pedagogyforglobalperspectivesineducation:Studiesof
teachers thinkingandpractice,TheoryandResearch inSocialEducation,
26(3),342378.
Miller,J.(1996).Theholisticcurriculum(2nded).Toronto:OISEPress.
Miller,J.,& Seller,W. (1985). Curriculumperspectives andpractices.NewYork:
Longman.
Mortimore, P. (Ed.) (1999). Understanding pedagogy and its impact on learning.
London,UK:PaulChapman.
Myers,J. (2004). Assessment and evaluation in social studies: A question of
balance. In A. Sears & I. Wright (Eds.), Challenges and prospects inCanadian social studies (pp. 290301).Vancouver,BC:PacificEducation
Press.
OntarioMinistryofEducationandTraining.(1999).TheOntariocurriculumgrades
9and10,Canadianandworldstudies.Toronto:MET.
OntarioMinistryofEducationandTraining.(2000).TheOntariocurriculumgrades
11and12,Canadianandworldstudies.Toronto:MET.
OntarioMinistryofEducationandTraining, (1999).OntarioSecondarySchools
Grades9to12ProgramandDiplomaRequirements. Toronto:MET.
Osborne, K. (1997). The teaching of history and democratic citizenship. In P.
Clark&R.Case(Eds.),TheCanadiananthologyofsocialstudies(pp.2940).
Vancouver,BC:SimonFraserUniversityPress.
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
25/26
434 MARKEVANSOsborne,K. (2001).Democracy,democraticcitizenship,andeducation. InJ .P.
Portelli&R.P.Solomon(Eds.),Theerosionofdemocracyineducation(pp.2961).Calgary,AB:DetseligEnterprises.
Osler,A. (2000).TheCrickReport:Difference, equality, and racialjustice.The
CurriculumJournal,11(1),2537.
Pike,G.,&Selby,D.(2000).Intheglobalclassroom2.Toronto:Pippin.
Pratt, D. (1994). Curriculum planning: A handbook for professionals. Toronto:
HarcourtBraceCollegePublishers.
QualificationsandCurriculumAuthority(England)(QCA).(1998).Educationfor
citizenship and the teaching of democracy in schools (The Crick Report).
London, UK: Department for Education and Employment/
Qualifications
and
Curriculum
Authority.
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (England) (QCA) (1999). Citizenship
(TheNationalCurriculum forEngland). London,UK:Departmentfor
EducationandEmployment/Qualifications andCurriculumAuthority.
Ross,A.(2000).Curriculum:Constructionandcritique.London,UK:FalmerPress.
Ross,A.(2001).Citizenshipeducationandcurriculumtheory.InstituteforPolicy
StudiesinEducation(IPSE),UniversityofNorthLondon,115.
Sears,A.(1996).Somethingdifferenttoeveryone:Conceptionsofcitizenshipand
citizenshipeducation.CanadianandInternationalEducation25(2),115.
Sears,A. (2004). In search of good citizens: Citizenship education and social
studiesinCanada.InA.Sears&I.Wright(Eds.),Challengesandprospects
inCanadiansocialstudies(pp.90106).Vancouver,BC:PacificEducation
Press.
Sears,A.M.,Clarke,G.,&Hughes,A. (1999).Canadian citizenshipeducation:
Thepluralistidealandcitizenshipeducationforapostmodernstate.In
J TorneyPurta,J. Schwille,&J.Amadeo (Eds.), Civic education across
countries: Twentyfour national case studies from the IEA civic education
project (pp. 112135). Amsterdam: International Association for the
EvaluationofEducationalAchievement.
Shafir,G. (Ed.) (1998).The citizenship debates. Minneapolis,MN:University of
MinnesotaPress.
Shulman,L. (1987).Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of thenew reform.
HarvardEducationalReview57(1),122.
8/6/2019 What Teachers Say and Do-Evans
26/26
EDUCATINGFORCITIZENSHIP 435
StrongBoag,V.(1996).Claimingaplaceinthenation:Citizenshipeducationand
thechallengeof feminists,Natives,andworkers inpostconfederationCanada.CanadianandInternationalEducation,25(2),128145.
Supple,C.(2000).Citizenshipinaction.Tomorrowscitizen,1416.
Thorpe,T.(2001,2005).Understandingcitizenship:PupilBook1,2,&3.London,
UK:TheCitizenshipFoundation/Hodder&Stoughton.
TorneyPurta,J.,Schwille,J.,&Amadeo,J. (Eds). (1999).Civiceducationacross
countries: Twentyfour national case studies from the IEA civic
educationproject.Amsterdam: InternationalAssociationfor theEvaluation
ofEducationalAchievement(IEA).
TurnerBisset, R. (2001). Expert teaching: Knowledge and pedagogy to lead the
profession.
London,
UK:
David
Fulton
Publishers.