03 SES 04 A, Citizenship Education: Teachers' and Students' Voices in Curriculum Design
There is an extensive body of knowledge about the contribution of discussions on controversial issues to the students' tolerance (Avery, 2010), promoting democratic values (Hess, 2009), understanding content (Brookfield & Preskill, 2012) interest in politics (McAvoy & Hess, 2013) and civic engagement (Lemish, 2003; Lin, Lawrence, Snow, & Taylor, 2016). In spite of these arguments, research has shown that teachers have qualms about discussing controversial topics and that such discussions are seldom held (Moore, 2012; Rossi, 2006). Teachers feel unprepared to present controversial topics in the classroom and their low status within the sociopolitical context contributes to their reluctance to discuss controversial topics (Bekerman, 2016; Oulton, Day, Dillon, & Grace, 2004). In this quantitative study, we explored 1621 high school teachers’ attitudes about conducting class discussions on the relationships between Jews and Arabs in Israel. The study compared civic and social studies teachers (N= 266) with teachers of other disciplines (N=1359) on handling controversial topics in class. We examined teachers' attitudes towards pluralism in general and specifically in education, their feelings of self-efficacy in conducting discussions and their feelings of support in case of a complaint against them. We surveyed teachers' knowledge of Ministry of Education guidelines regarding the limits of freedom of expression and the way teachers perceived their role as shaping civil identity. Finally, we examined teachers' reports of conducting discussions in their classrooms. The findings indicated that civic teachers had significantly higher scores on all dependent and independent variables. When examining the way teachers rank different aspects of their role as teachers, social studies teachers ranked encouraging active citizenship and critical thinking the highest while teachers of other disciplines ranked setting boundaries and fostering self-discipline the highest. In summary, there is a well-documented gap between the literature supporting the importance of conducting controversial discussions in class and teachers’ reluctance to engage in such discussions.. Teachers in Israel are in an atmosphere that inhibits discussion and thus lean back on their role as disciplinarians. A broadening of teachers’ role to include critical thinking and containment of complex is vital for teachers of all disciplines. Our findings indicate that the teacher training civic and social studies teachers undergo provides some remedy to this gap, but teacher training should be congruent with informal and formal policy for this to be achieved.
Avery, P. (2010). Can tolerance be taught? In W. Parker (Ed.), Social studies today: Research and practice (pp. 235–243). New York, N.Y.: Routledge. Bekerman, Z. (2016). The Promise of Integrated Multicultural and Bilingual Education: Inclusive Palestinian-Arab and Jewish Schools in Israel. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Brookfield, S. D., & Preskill, S. (2012). Discussion as a Way of Teaching: Tools and Techniques for Democratic Classrooms. San Francisco, CA.: John Wiley & Sons. Hess, D. (2009). Controversy in the classroom: The democratic power of discussion. New York, NY: Routledge. Lemish, P. (2003). Civic and citizenship education in Israel. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(1), 53–72. Lin, A. R., Lawrence, J. F., Snow, C. E., & Taylor, K. S. (2016). Assessing Adolescents’ Communicative Self-Efficacy to Discuss Controversial Issues: Findings From a Randomized Study of the Word Generation Program. Theory & Research in Social Education, 44(3), 316–343. McAvoy, P., & Hess, D. (2013). Classroom Deliberation in an Era of Political Polarization. Curriculum Inquiry, 43(1), 14–47. Moore, J. (2012). A Challenge for Social Studies Educators: Increasing Civility in Schools and Society by Modeling Civic Virtues. The Social Studies, 103(4), 140–148. Rossi, J. A. (2006). The Dialogue of Democracy. The Social Studies, 97(3), 112–120.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.