what teachers say and do-evans

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.

_________________


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


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.


4/26


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.


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


6/26


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


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


8/26


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


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


10/26


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,


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


12/26


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


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


14/26


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


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).


16/26


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


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.


18/26


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


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


20/26


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.


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.


22/26


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.


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.


24/26


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.


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.


26/26


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.

what teachers say and do-evans

Documents