Abstract European societies increasingly implement diversity education as part of citizenship education (CE) curricula in order to provide young people with skills for dealing with diversity. This article analyses the policies and practices of diversity education at both the level of the European Union and the Council of Europe, and on the level of nation states, focusing on Germany and Russia as examples. In Europe, diversity education at schools simultaneously pursues two separate goals: on the one hand, teaching materials and education policies generate a grand narrative of celebrating European diversity. On the other, those same materials and policies stipulate that issues of inequality are to be dealt with separately. Thus, within European citizenship, diversity education and inequalities are often decoupled. Conceptualizing diversity in terms of heterogeneities and inequalities, this article reveals the ways in which diversity and inequalities are decoupled in citizenship and civic education and asks what happens when diversity is treated only as a matter of celebration. Examining blog posts from LGBTQ youth who are minority learners who experience exclusion, the article demonstrates the way in which the narrative of celebration of diversity disempowers them and how it contributes towards more uncertainty and more (self-)exclusion of those learners who do not find themselves within celebration of diversity narratives. The article argues for a reintroduction of the term 'heterogeneities' into CE and concludes by suggesting that diversity education as part of CE should begin with the question of whether there are any heterogeneities that do not require action or critical reflection.
Die Verfasserin untersucht die Entwicklungen der Politik und der Praktiken im Hinblick auf die Bildung von europäischer Identität in ihrer 'weichen' Dimension. Die Herauskristallisierung einer europäischen Identität wird als Gegenstand der Politik europäischer Institutionen dargestellt. Anhand der Analyse von relevanten Aktivitäten innerhalb der Europäischen Union werden die Spannungsverhältnisse zwischen der Identifikation mit Europa und mit den einzelnen Nationalstaaten herausgearbeitet. Im Mittelpunkt des Forschungsinteresses stehen die politischen Ziele und Instrumente der EU bei der Förderung eines europäischen Selbstverständnisses der Bürger von Mitgliedstaaten. Es wird die These vertreten, dass die Dynamik der Identitätsbildung im Rahmen der europäischen Integration keineswegs als eine Ignoranz gegenüber der Identifikation mit den einzelnen Nationalstaaten verstanden werden soll: Im Gegenteil, die Zugehörigkeit zur EU wird durch die Identifikation der Bürger mit den einzelnen Nationalstaaten vermittelt, die EU-Mitglieder sind. (ICF).
Wie jede andere akademische Disziplin steht auch die Soziologie vor der zwiespältigen Aufgabe, in einem Studiengang berufsqualifizierend ausbilden zu müssen und gleichzeitig den eigenen wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchs heranzuziehen. Dies wirft Fragen nach der Identität des Soziologen auf: Welchen Bezug haben die in der Praxis tätigen Soziologen zu ihrer Herkunftsdisziplin? Wie sehen Hochschullehrer die Zukunft ihrer Studierenden und worauf werden diese im Studium vorbereitet? Was sind die Besonderheiten und Defizite der soziologischen Professionalisierung? Ist das typische Berufsbild eines Soziologen das eines Beraters - und was ist soziologische Beratung? Die Studie leistet auf empirischer Basis einen Beitrag zur Selbstreflexion der Soziologie.
Participation as an element of active citizenship in democracies is a key project of international and national educational policy. Institutionalized approaches for compulsory schools provide participatory access to all young European citizens. But does this picture depict the possibilities and practices of participation appropriately? Can this standard approach to participation be translated into action in view of diverse polities, policies, political cultures, institutions and practices of participation? This book explores what prerequisites must be given for a successful implementation of s
Verfügbarkeit an Ihrem Standort wird überprüft
Dieses Buch ist auch in Ihrer Bibliothek verfügbar:
Hidden and unhidden normativity in Social science education and History education are being intensively researched and criticized in both educational scientific and media discourses (Gatto 2002). In addition, they are extensively discussed in teacher education and concealed or explicated in education policies and curricula for these school subjects. These discussions are further, to more or less extent, related to civic and citizenship education, as well as to political discourses more generally (e.g. Papastephanou, 2007; Hedtke, Zimenkova & Hippe, 2008 in previous issues of JSSE). Not only do political actors at macro level try to provide for citizen formation with help of Social science education and History education . A multitude of other actors at regional and local level – be it non-governmental, religious or economic actors, or parents – bring their own agendas and normative stances into the school subjects of Social science education and History Education. The term "hidden curricula" and the idea of (hidden) normativity are further associated with national and supra national policy agendas and grand cultural narratives. However, local and regional specifics that are intimately connected to the normatively laden conceptions of citizenship education and learning inside and outside of school, we argue, can and should be provided increased attention in research. In this special issue, two school subjects are highlighted: Social science education and History education. The very idea of normativity of Social science education and History education is being evaluated quite differently in different national educational settings and subject didactic traditions. It encompasses the whole range from being considered as allowable and wishful in order to reach some central moral, political or other normative goals of society to absolute ban and resolute absence of any substantive or normative qualification of social science and history teachers as professionals (for the German discussion, cf. Besand et al., 2011). This special issue of the JSSE, entitled (Hidden) Normativity in Social Science Education and History Education brings together empirical, methodological and theoretical contributions that in one way or the other elaborate on normativity in Social science education and History education. Central questions addressed in the call are: How is normativity visible and formed within Social science education and History education? How can these processes be approached empirically? Is there something wrong with normativity, and if so why? Which role does normativity play for social science teachers and history teachers in their profession? The authors in this issue have created vital responses to these questions, suggesting new comparative methodologies and opening up innovative areas of empirical research in more or less theoretical framings. The following specific approaches to research on normativity in Social science education and History education are embraced by the authors: - Normativity is stressed as a phenomenon indisputably related to Social science education and History education. But the modes of normativity, its explicitness, direction, strength and actors alter. Education policy and practice are deeply entwined, and processes of normative change come to the fore in critical and constructive investigations of central concepts in these school subjects, at different school levels and over time. Out of different theoretical and methodological approaches, the authors demonstrate convincingly the necessity to consider different sources of empirical material in order not only to map and describe different facets of normativity in Social science education and History education. But also to make a case for the complexity involved in the intermingling of hidden and unhidden normativity in the everyday practice of teaching and learning of these school subjects. - Focusing different forms of knowledge and conceptual uses in policy and practice in Social science education and History education (at mainly upper secondary level) allow for approaching normativity not only as a matter of detecting where it is situated in these school subjects and why this is so. It also contributes to the development of relevant subject specific methodological frameworks that may be considered key for the development of this field of research. - Sociological and other educational theories and methods deriving from social sciences are being use innovatively by the authors. In doing so, we argue, they open up for a widening of the scope as regards the meaning and importance of theoretically underpinned comparative approaches to the research field of subject didactics. - By stressing critical concepts and conceptual uses in Social science education and History education, the intimate connection between these subjects and their assigned task to see to citizenship learning and social formation emerges. ; Guest Editors' introductory text to the theme issue (Hidden) Normativity in Social Science Education and History Education.
Hidden and unhidden normativity in Social science education and History education are being intensively researched and criticized in both educational scientific and media discourses (Gatto 2002). In addition, they are extensively discussed in teacher education and concealed or explicated in education policies and curricula for these school subjects. These discussions are further, to more or less extent, related to civic and citizenship education, as well as to political discourses more generally (e.g. Papastephanou, 2007; Hedtke, Zimenkova & Hippe, 2008 in previous issues of JSSE). Not only do political actors at macro level try to provide for citizen formation with help of Social science education and History education . A multitude of other actors at regional and local level – be it non- governmental, religious or economic actors, or parents – bring their own agendas and normative stances into the school subjects of Social science education and History Education. The term "hidden curricula" and the idea of (hidden) normativity are further associated with national and supra national policy agendas and grand cultural narratives. However, local and regional specifics that are intimately connected to the normatively laden conceptions of citizenship edu- cation and learning inside and outside of school, we argue, can and should be provided increased attention in research. In this special issue, two school subjects are highlighted: Social science education and History education. The very idea of normativity of Social science education and History education is being evaluated quite differently in different national educational settings and subject didactic traditions. It encom- passes the whole range from being considered as allowable and wishful in order to reach some central moral, political or other normative goals of society to absolute ban and resolute absence of any substantive or normative qualification of social science and history teachers as professionals (for the German discussion, cf. Besand et al., 2011). This special issue of the JSSE, entitled (Hidden) Normativity in Social Science Education and History Education brings together empirical, methodological and theoretical contributions that in one way or the other elaborate on normativity in Social science edu- cation and History education. Central questions addressed in the call are: How is normativity visible and formed within Social science education and History education? How can these processes be approached empirically? Is there something wrong with normativity, and if so why? Which role does normativity play for social science teachers and history teachers in their profession? The authors in this issue have created vital responses to these questions, suggesting new comparative methodologies and opening up innovative areas of empirical research in more or less theoretical framings. The following specific approaches to research on normativity in Social science education and History education are embraced by the authors: - Normativity is stressed as a phenomenon indisputably related to Social science education and History education. But the modes of normativity, its explicitness, direction, strength and actors alter. Education policy and practice are deeply entwined, and processes of normative change come to the fore -- in critical and constructive investigations of central concepts in these school subjects, at different school levels and over time. Out of different theoretical and methodological approaches, the authors demon- strate convincingly the necessity to consider differ- rent sources of empirical material in order not only to map and describe different facets of normativity in Social science education and History education. But also to make a case for the complexity involved in the intermingling of hidden and unhidden normativity in the everyday practice of teaching and learning of these school subjects. - Focusing different forms of knowledge and conceptual uses in policy and practice in Social science education and History education (at mainly upper secondary level) allow for approaching normativity not only as a matter of detecting where it is situated in these school subjects and why this is so. It also contributes to the development of relevant subject specific methodological frameworks that may be considered key for the development of this field of research. - Sociological and other educational theories and methods deriving from social sciences are being use innovatively by the authors. In doing so, we argue, they open up for a widening of the scope as regards the meaning and importance of theoretically underpinned comparative approaches to the research field of subject didactics. - By stressing critical concepts and conceptual uses in Social science education and History edu- cation, the intimate connection between these subjects and their assigned task to see to citizenship learning and social formation emerges. ; Editorial presentation and problematisation of the concept of Normativity in Social Science Education and History Education
The present research on the development of citizenship education in (transformation) countries fails to ac-knowledge that systems of citizenship education are political organisations by nature. This research does not analyse citizenship education (CE) as a multi-level, multi-actor and multi-interest system with multiple envi-ronments. The diverse environmental and internal demands addressed to CE actors are also ignored. This paper sees CE as situated and developing in a tension field of diverse and contradicting demands to which each organised CE actor has to respond simultaneously. This especially holds for post-socialist transforma-tion countries but applies as well to "old" democracies which, like the aforementioned, are confronted with the challenges of Europeanisation and migration. A multi-level actor-centred approach, acknowledging actor-specific perspectives, as suggested in this article, is essential for understanding the complex interplay of demands and reactions (talk, decision and action) of different actors and hence the change of CE under the conditions of societal change or transformation.
Although a lot of stock-taking research on citizenship education in European countries has already be done, some key features of citizenship education especially in transformation countries are not understood as yet. The authors briefly outline the state of the art and criticize its main shortcomings. As a result, they suggest a research agenda to enhance the knowledge about citizenship education with respect to its interconnectedness with processes of transformation and to its embeddedness into different political cultures, institutions and democracies. They propose to realise multilevel and multiactor case studies which perceive citizenship education as an organisational issue, too.
