Unlike the previous phenomenon of modern art, contemporary art strives to return to society and everyday life, while thematizing current social, political and economic issues that the individual faces here and now. One of its more common topics is sustainable development, and the accompanying issues of environment, globalisation, migration, intercultural exchange, values, relation to others etc. All these topics are part of the concept of active citizenship, which is why understanding contemporary art calls for active citizenship. This particularly goes for relational art/socially engaged art/participatory art practices, which demands active participation from the part of the viewer. This paper inquires into the possibilities of connection of contemporary art and citizenship education in elementary schools. Contemporary pedagogic doctrine highly encourages cross-curricular teaching; I have therefore focused my analysis on the curricula of the subjects of Art education, and Citizenship and patriotic education and ethics (hereinafter: CPE), determining that from this perspective their link is quite troublesome. The absence of contemporary art from the curriculum of Art education has been warned upon on many occasions, but the problem of its curriculum seems to be of conceptual nature. Only by a more intense inter-institutional link between schools and contemporary art galleries and museums can the common goals of art education and citizenship education be realized. L. Vigotski said that Art has always been perceived also as a part and means of education, that is to say as part of a long-term altering of our behaviour and demeanour (Vigotski, 1975, p. 319). The aesthetic experience and response to it can lead a child to re-evaluation and reflection of its relations, values, expectations and even confrontation with its prejudice, which makes it potentially morally educative (Halstead, Pike, 2006, p. 64, 65). Due to its interdisciplinary nature, the suitable choice of an artwork, makes it easily linked with all contents and objectives of citizenship education. P. Hills-Potter has already showed that art can induce people into participation in society and impart a relationship required for active citizenship, especially an empathic one (quoted in Halstead, Pike, 2006, p. 66). The paper will therefore strive to show potential cross curricular links in content on three examples of participatory practices (Proletarians of All Countries, Beggar Robot and EU/Others), which thematizing one of the general objectives of the CPE Syllabus: the perception of the stereotypic representation of the others and of the different. The paper also warning from the pedagogic perspective against the often neglected fact that contemporary art is experienced here and now.

Bračun Sova, R.; Kemperl, M. (2012). The Curricular Reform of Art Education in Primary School in Slovenia in Terms of Certain Components of the European Competence of Cultural Awareness and Expression, Ceps Journal, 2, 2, pp. 71-90. Charman, H. in Ross, M. (2002). Contemporary Art and the Role of Interpretation. Tate Papers, Autumn 2004, From: http://www.tate.org.uk/research/tateresearch/tatepapers/04autumn/charman.htm, 15th Oct 2012. Grafenauer, P. (2011). Velika prostovoljna čistilna akcija: Sašo Sedlaček! In: Sašo Sedlaček: Supertrash. Ljubljana: Aksioma; Slovenj Gradec: Koroška galerija likovnih umetnosti, pp. 22-46. Halstead, J. M., Pike, M. A. (2006). Citizenship and Moral Education: Values in action. London: Routledge. Helguera, P. (2011). Education for socially engaged art: a materials and techniques handbook. New York: Jorge Pinto Books. Hickman, R., Kiss, L. (2010). Cross-Curricular Gallery Learning: A Phenomenological Case Study. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 29(1), 27-36. Knight, L. (2010). Why a Child Needs a critical Eye, and Why the Classroom is Central in Developing it, The International Journal of Art & Design Education, 29(3), pp. 236-243. Krauss, R. (1988). The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths, Cambridge. London: MIT Press. Kymlicka, W. (1999). Education for Citizenship, The School Field: International Journal of Theory and research in education, 10(1-2), pp. 9-36. Megla, M. (2012). Šejla Kamerić, vizualna umetnica: Umetnost ni samo za privilegirane, Delo, Sobotna priloga, 5. 5. 2012, pp. 24, 25. Stibbs, A. (1998). »Language in art and art in language«, Journal of Art and Design Education, 17(2), pp. 201-209. Talboys, G. K. (2010). Using museums as an educational resource: An Intorductory Handbook for Students and Teachers. Farnham in Burlington, VT: Ashgate Učni načrt: program osnovna šola: likovna vzgoja (2011). Ljubljana: Ministrstvo za šolstvo in šport, Zavod RS za šolstvo. Učni načrt: program osnovna šola: državljanska in domovinska vzgoja ter etika (2011). Ljubljana: Ministrstvo za šolstvo in šport, Zavod RS za šolstvo. Vigotski, L. S. (1975). Psihologija umetnosti, Beograd: Nolit. Weintraub L. (2003). Making contemporary art: How today's artists think and work. London: Thames & Hudson. Zabel, I. (2005). »Sodobna umetnost«, In Španjol, I, Zabel, I. (Eds.) 95ʼ05. Teritoriji, identitete, mreže: Slovenska umetnost 1995 – 2005. Ljubljana: Moderna galerija 2005, pp. 6-19. Žerovc, B. (2011b). Serkan Őzkaya, In P. Kisin, B. Žerovc (Eds.). Dogodek. The event, 29. Grafični bienale. The 29th Biennal of Grafic Arts. 23. September-20.november 2011. 23 September-20 November 2011. Ljubljana: Mednarodni grafični center, pp. 142, 143.