National Curriculum for Citizenship in England: Social Foundations, Strands and Essential Elements

Abstract

Although citizenship education in England has been a statutory subject in the National Curriculum since 2002, schools have had independence in setting their own teaching programmes for the subject since a revision made in 2010. This led to different programmes being applied in almost every school and Citizenship became a school-specific subject. The purpose of this study is to discuss the social foundations, common strands and essential elements of the different citizenship education programmes in three secondary schools visited in London. Document analyses method was used in this qualitative research. The main documents reviewed for this study include the Crick Report (1998), the Ajegbo Report (2007), and the 2002, 2008 and 2013 Citizenship programmes. Citizenship programmes at three different public secondary schools in London were also reviewed. It is significant that there were still four common strands of the programmes in the schools visited even though each school can independently set their own programmes. These common strands were: rights and responsibilities, social participation, government and democracy, identities and differences. Additionally, these schools also had three common essential elements in the programmes: concepts, values and dispositions, skills and aptitudes. In spite of the revision made in 2010, schools are still following the recommendations of the Crick (1998) and Ajegbo Report (2007) on citizenship education. It is also noteworthy that the process of seeking a solution to certain social problems was the key for the introduction of citizenship education and revisions of the programmes in the years following 2002.

Keywords

• England’s citizenship education,Programme,Social foundations,Strands,Elements

İngiltere Vatandaşlık Eğitimi Programı: Toplumsal Temelleri, Boyutları ve Temel Bileşenleri

Abstract

İngiltere’de vatandaşlık dersi her ne kadar 2002 yılından itibaren Ulusal Programda zorunlu dersler arasında yer alsa da 2010 yılında yapılan değişiklikle okullar bu dersi kendi istedikleri şekilde uygulayabilmektedir. Bu durum, vatandaşlık dersini farklı öğretim programı ve uygulamaların görüldüğü her bir okula özgü olan bir derse dönüştürmüştür. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Londra’da ziyaret edilen üç ilköğretim okulundaki farklı vatandaşlık öğretim programlarının toplumsal temellerini, ortak boyutlarını ve temel bileşenlerini değerlendirmektir. Bu çalışma, nitel bir araştırma olup araştırmada doküman incelemesi yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Çalışma kapsamında; Crick Raporu (1998), 2002 programı, Ajegbo Raporu (2007), 2008 programı, 2014 programı ve üç okulun öğretim programı belgeleri incelenmiştir. Araştırma bulgularına bakıldığı zaman, okullarda her ne kadar bir birinden farklılaşan programlar uygulansa da vatandaşlık öğretim programlarının ortak dört boyutunun olduğu anlaşılmaktadır. Bunlar; haklar ve sorumluluklar, toplumsal katılım, hükümet ve demokrasi, kimlikler ve farklılıklar. Bunların yanında; kavramlar, değerler ve eğilimler, beceri ve yetenekler olmak üzere programların üç temel bileşeni vardır. Bu boyutlar ve temel bileşenler, 2010 ve sonrasında yapılan değişikliklere rağmen, okulların Crick Raporu (1998) ve Ajegbo Raporu (2007)’nun vatandaşlık eğitimi ile ilgili önerilerini takip ettiklerini göstermesi bakımından önemlidir. Ayrıca, vatandaşlık eğitiminin ilk kez zorunlu olmasında ve sonrasında programda yapılan değişikliklerde, dönemin toplumsal gelişmelerinin belirgin bir şekilde programın boyutlarını etkilediği görülmüştür.

Keywords

• İngiltere vatandaşlık eğitimi,Program,Toplumsal temeller,Boyutlar,Bileşenler

References

1. Advisory Group on Citizenship (1998). Education for Citizenship and the Teaching of Democracy in Schools (London, Qualifications and Curriculum Authority). (Crick Report)
2. Ajegbo, K. (2007). Curriculum Review: Diversity and Citizenship (London, Department for Education and Skills). (Ajegbo Report)
3. Amnesty International UK (2011). David Blunkett: Removing citizenship classes from National Curriculum 'absurd'. https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/david-blunkett-removing-citizenship-classes-national-curriculum-absurd adresinden 13.06.2017 tarihinde edinilmiştir.
4. BBC (2010). Q&A: Academies and free schools. http://www.bbc.com/news/10161371 adresinden 13.06.2017 tarihinde edinilmiştir.
5. BBC (2011). State multiculturalism has failed, says David Cameron. BBC News Online. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-12371994 adresinden 18.11.2016 tarihinde edinilmiştir.
6. Burton, D. ve May, S. (2015). Citizenship education in secondary schools in England. Educational Futures, 7(1), 76-91.
7. Citizenship Foundation (2012). David Blunkett interview. http://blog.citizenshipfoundation.org.uk/2012/02/03/david-blunkett-interview-the-governments-plan-for-citizenship-education-is-really-very-bad-news/ adresinden 13.06.2017 tarihinde edinilmiştir.
8. Davies I. ve Chong, E. K. M. (2016). Current challenges for citizenship education in England. Asian Education and Development Studies, 5(1), 20-36. doi: 10.1108/AEDS-05-2015-0015

9. DfE (2013). Citizenship Programmes of Study: key Stages 3 and 4. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/239060/SECONDARY_national_curriculum_-_Citizenship.pdf adresinden 16.06.2017 tarihinde edinilmiştir. (2014 vatandaşlık eğitimi programı).
10. DfE (2013a). The National Curriculum in England: Key Stage 3 and 4 Framework Document. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/425601/PRIMARY_national_curriculum.pdf adresinden 07.11.2015 tarihinde edinilmiştir.
11. Ertürk, S. (2013). Eğitimde Program Geliştirme. Ankara: Edge Akademi Yayınları
12. Eurydice (2012). Citizenship education in Europe. Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency. http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/documents/thematic_reports/139EN.pdf adresinden 16.06.2017 tarihinde edinilmiştir.
13. Hahn, C. (2015). Teachers’ perceptions of education for democratic citizenship in schools with transnational youth: A comparative study in the UK and Denmark. Research in Comparative and International Education, 10(1), 95-119. doi: 10.1177/1745499914567821
14. Heater, D. (2004). A History of Education for Citizenship. London: Routledge.
15. Jerome, L. (2012). Citizenship Education: A Case Study of Curriculum Policy (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Institute of Education, University of London, London, UK.
16. Jerome, L. ve Moorse, E. (2014). Should we make room for rebels and radicals in the national curriculum for citizenship?. https://www.psa.ac.uk/sites/default/files/conference/papers/2014/LJerome_LMoorse_Rebels_Radicals_PSAPaper.pdf adresinden 07.11.2015 tarihinde edinilmiştir.
17. Keating, A., Kerr, D., Benton, T., Mundy, E. ve Lopes, J. (2011). Citizenship education in England 2001-2010: young people’s practices and prospects for the future: the eighth and final report from the Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study (CELS). (London, Department for Education) Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/181797/DFE-RR059.pdf adresinden 21.11.2016 tarihinde edinilmiştir.
18. Kerr, D., Smith, A. ve Twine, C. (2008). Citizenship education in the United Kingdom. In: Arthur J, Davies I and Hahn C (eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Education for Citizenship and Democracy. London: SAGE Publications, pp. 252–262.
19. Kisby, B. (2007). New Labour and Citizenship Education: Social Capital, Policy Networks and the Introduction of Citizenship Lessons in Schools. (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
20. Kiwan, D. (2008). Education for inclusive citizenship. London: Routledge.
21. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M. ve Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook, (3rd edn.). London: Sage.
22. Osler, A. ve Starkey, H. (2000). Citizenship, human rights, and cultural diversity, in A. Osler (ed.), Citizenship and Democracy in Schools: diversity, identity, equality (Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books Ltd.).
23. Perryman, J. (2011). The return of the native: the blurred boundaries of insider/outsider research in an English secondary school. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 24 (7), 857-874. doi: 10.1080/09518398.2010.529842
24. Pykett, J. (2007). Making citizens governable? The Crick Report as governmental technology. Journal of Education Policy, 22(3), 301-319. doi: 10.1080/02680930701269202
25. Pykett, J. (2010). Citizenship education and narratives of pedagogy. Citizenship Studies, 14(6), 621-635. doi: 10.1080/13621025.2010.522345
26. The Guardian (2011). Don't scrap citizenship lessons, teachers plead. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2011/jan/20/dont-scrap-citizenship-teachers-plead adresinden 13.06.2017 tarihinde edinilmiştir.
27. The Fourth Reform Act (1918). Representation of the People Act 1918. http://www.parliament.uk/about/living heritage/transformingsociety/electionsvoting/womenvote/parliamentary-collections/collections-the-vote-and-after/representation-of-the-people-act-1918/ adresinden 13.06.2017 tarihinde edinilmiştir.
28. UKPOLITICAL (2015). General election turnout 1945 – 2017. http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout45.htm adresinden 13.06.2017 tarihinde edinilmiştir.
29. QCA (2000). Citizenship Programmes of Study: key stages 3 and 4. London: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. (2002 vatandaşlık eğitimi programı).
30. QCA (2007). Citizenship Programmes of Study: key stages 3 and 4. London: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. (2007 vatandaşlık eğitimi programı).
31. White Paper (1997). Excellence in Schools. http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/wp1997/excellence-in-schools.html adresinden 13.06.2017 tarihinde edinilmiştir.
32. Whiteley P. (2014). Does citizenship education work? Evidence from a decade of citizenship education in secondary schools in England. Parliamentary Affairs, 67, 513–535.