There is currently a European interest to define citizenship education for diversified societies, and due to heterogeneous justice claims. It is therefore necessary to debate the current state of inclusive citizenship education with regard to some of the recent rights movements, e.g. changes in citizenship law, new marriage and civil union, or the rights of persons with disabilities. Citizenship textbooks present specific ways to speak about these cultural and political issues. They expose social relations – or a social order – and they show a variety of interest and claims. Textbooks draw pictures of those who count as “fellow citizen” and as a “subject of justice” (Fraser 2008; see also Müller-Mathis 2015). They depict central issues of “just membership” (Benhabib 2004) and they potentially address young people as full members of citizenship learning. The authors of textbooks, as I argue, introduce citizenship from their particular point of view: they show a crucial content, as well as a political interest, an epistemological belief, a kind of dealing with knowledge about the “substance of justice” (Fraser 2008) and a mode to make-up people claiming for political representation. Of course, any text will awake a plethora of receptions (Hall 2007), but there is also a systematic conception created by the authors, who show us their ways of knowing about diversified citizenship, in general, and their overall understanding of knowledge and truth, in particular. The novel concept introduced by my educational research focusses “science as culture” (Franklin 1995) and investigates how “cultures of science” (ibid. 1995) – especially cultures of teaching knowledge – influence learning. The idea of “science as culture”, as Franklin discusses, is a tool to interrogate with scientific “knowledge practices”. In this paper, I inquire not only how textbooks present people, but also how authors´ epistemological beliefs might structure citizenship learning. To this effect, do their texts confirm or contest imaginations of the `ethnic other´ or the `abled citizen´? How do these texts present `female or queer representatives´? How do they tell about class-related issues? Textbooks include to a greater or lesser extend different epistemological beliefs – modes of evidence-based truth or partial truth – and they present knowledge about ethnicity, disability, gender and sexuality or class by giving evidences, graphs, tables, stories, cartoons or dialogues and by presenting reified groups or subversive characters. Furthermore, I compare different textbooks used in English and German lower secondary schools, thus I search for science- and subject-related similarities and specifics according to two national curricula. Both are characterised by multidisciplinary subjects, like “citizenship education” (England) (see Thomas et al. 2009) or “community studies” and “politics and economy” (Germany) (see Abs. et al. 2009). Here, along the lines of “cultures of science” multidisciplinary subjects maybe contour new, fuzzy, rival or intermeshing ways of citizenship learning. In that way, textbooks present content, constructed by (more or less diverse) cultural epistemology and “subject culture”, and they address pupils as producers of such knowledge. There are different ways texts and tasks address learners: pupils paraphrase a clear matter or compare the controversial, they find their voice or miss having a say, and they generate abstract knowledge or reflect on their own involvement into inequality. Pupils´ reading of such texts, of course, will engender a variety of receptions; a research question I will carry on in further research. The aim of this paper, however, is to analyse textbooks and to reconstruct popular ways of instruction, knowing and knowledge production. In conclusion, the work starts examining the cultures of inclusive citizenship education in English and German classrooms, and it debates the role of science in social knowledge production.

Abs, H.-J., H. Breit, A. Huppert, A. Schmidt, and S. Müller-Mathis 2009. Germany. In Informal learning of active citizenship at school. An international comparative study in seven countries, ed. J. Scheerens. Dordrecht: Springer. Benhabib, S. 2004. The rights of the others. Aliens, residents, and citizens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bohnsack, R. and A. Geimer 2015. Filminterpretation als Produktanalyse in Relation zur Rezeptionsanalyse. In Dokumentarische Video- und Filminterpretation. Methodologie und Forschungspraxis, ed. R. Bohnsack, B. Fritzsche, and M. Wagner-Willi. Opladen: B. Budrich. Brubaker, R. 2006. Ethnicity without groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Fraser, N. 2008. Scales of justice. Reimagining the political space in a globalizing world. New York: Columbia University Press. Franklin, S. 1995. Science as culture, cultures of science. Annual Review of Anthropology 24, 163-184. Hall, S. 2007. The spectacle of the `other´. In Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices, ed. S. Hall. London: Sage. Müller-Mathis, S. 2015. Die Bildung der Anderen. Bildungsgerechtigkeit in der Migrationsgesellschaft aus der Sicht von Jugendlichen. Giessen: GEB. Nohl, A.-M. 2010. The documentary interpretation of narrative interviews. In Qualitative analysis and documentary method in international research, ed. R. Bohnsack, N. Pfaff, and W. Weller. Opladen: B. Budrich. QSR 2010. NVivo 9. Basics. QSR. Thomas, S., W.J. Peng, and W.C. Yee 2009. England. In Informal learning of active citizenship at school. An international comparative study in seven countries, ed. J. Scheerens. Dordrecht: Springer.