ERG SES C 07, Learning and Education
The configuration and the practice of citizenship and gender equality are some of the formal missions of the Portuguese public schools. Historically, these matters have also been the subject to concern, struggles and interventions by Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) (Magalhães, 1998). This paper addresses the results of the first study of a PhD research that aims to understand the educational profiles and roles played by different CSOs, concerning citizenship and gender issues in local school contexts. We analyse the Portuguese policies for gender equality and discuss their main dimensions considering some of the most recent changes in the Portuguese educational field. By doing so, we intend to identify the way the current policy architecture conceives the encounter between CSOs and schools, regarding gender equality and citizenship education.
Since 1997, Portugal addresses gender equality through specific policies, named National Plans for Gender Equality. These documents try to define a political meaning for gender equality, but due to the openness and contested nature of the gender equality concept (Lombardo, Meier & Verloo, 2009), several meanings can co-exist. In an era of risk, different political ambitions and societal ideals can emerge from individualized risk governance agendas, magnifying the tension that underlies the gender equality concept. Risk governance tends to emphasise an individualized political definition of equality – narrowing its meaning – and to subordinate equality initiatives to broader neoliberal policy agendas (Amery, 2018).
Concerning some of the most recent Portuguese educational policy changes, is being implemented, since 2017, a pedagogical strategy which seeks to enhance the autonomy and the curricular flexibility of primary and secondary education (Project for Autonomy and Curricular Flexibility). In the same year, the National Strategy for Citizenship Education (NSCE), in convergence with the Student Profile at the end of Compulsory Education and with the Essential Learning Outcomes, became a reference document for schools. In NSCE, Gender Equality (among other subjects such as Human Rights, Interculturality, Sustainable Development, Environmental Education and Health), appears as a mandatory theme that must be addressed along the whole educational journey. For each of these topics there are educational reference guides, provided by the Ministry of Education, and schools are encouraged to engage with their communities, namely with CSOs, enriching the educational curricula with concrete social experiences and practices.
CSOs have progressively become recognized as legitimate and formal interlocutors in the formulation and in the execution of citizenship and gender equality public policies (Alvarez, 2009). Still, it is important to consider that, beyond the gender equality label, there can be a wide range of goals and policies, namely risk governance agendas (Repo, 2016) that tend to narrow its political meaning. Therefore, these policies can also play a wider influence in the ways CSOs conceive gender equality (Monteiro, 2013) and the topics that are prioritized in their own political agendas and in their educational strategies.
This research is funded by FCT PhD studentship (SFRH/BD/128591/2017)
This presentation regards an empirical study concerning the analysis of citizenship education and gender equality policies. It aims to understand what these policies and programs state about: meanings and definitions of gender equality at this policy level; the place and role of Education, particularly Citizenship Education, in what regards gender equality and the role played by CSOs and schools in this matter. We proceed with a documental analysis supported by a thematic analysis (Clarke & Braun, 2013) that is primarily focused on the six National Plans for Gender Equality: National Plan for Global Opportunities (1997-2002); National Plan for Equality (2003-2006); National Plan for Equality – Citizenship and Gender (2007-2010); National Plan for Equality, Gender, Citizenship and Non-Discrimination (2011-2013); National Plan for Equality, Gender, Citizenship and Non-Discrimination (2014-2017) and the National Strategy for Equality and Non-Discrimination (2018-2030). These documents offer a general diagnosis of gender inequalities, present the outcomes pursued by the policy strategies and try to define a political meaning for gender equality. Regarding some of the recent educational policy changes, we proceed with a documental analysis of the following documents: Project for Autonomy and Curricular Flexibility; Student Profile at the end of Compulsory Education; Essential Learning Outcomes and the National Strategy for Citizenship Education. Through this analysis we intend to characterize the curricular and organizational context that is being promoted through policy and understand how the relational and collaborative opportunities between schools and CSOs are set and play an educational role, particularly in citizenship education regarding gender equality.
This PhD research intends to enlarge the scientific and the public knowledge about the educational role that CSOs plays in Portugal, within schools, concerning gender and citizenship subjects. The first study is taking place in the first semester of 2019. It aims to understand how the meaning of gender equality is being shaped by public policies and how the relationship between CSOs and schools is being framed and formed in the current policy context. The gender equality analysis demands for an identification of the broadening political initiatives that can enlarge the meaning of gender equality, but that can also threaten its substantive meaning (Lombardo et al., 2009). This analysis should also recognise the proposals that, under the political goal of gender equality, are being used to justify other purposes, merely related with gender equality and by then are bending it’s meaning (ibidem). At the educational level, the analysis focusses on the chances for Citizenship Education being regarded as a reflexivity space where the educational experience is about the conditions that make action and subjectivity possible (Biesta, 2007), or as locus for prevention strategies, that tends to prioritize the identification of social groups labelled as being at risk and targeting risky behaviours, that can be managed through the promotion of a self-regulated autonomy, that its heavily depoliticized (Bialostok, 2015).
Alvarez, Sonia E. (2009). Beyond NGO‐ization?: reflections from Latin America. Development, 52(2), 175-184. Amery, Fran. (2018). Why analysis of gender equality policy should pay attention to risk: the case of sexual and reproductive health policy in England. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, Summer, 1-23. Bialostok, Steve. (2015). Risk theory and education: policy and practice. Policy Futures in Education, 13(5), 561-576. Biesta, Gert. (2007). Education and the Democratic Person: Towards a Political Conception of Democratic Education. Teachers College Record, 109:3, 740-769. Clarke, Victoria & Braun, Virginia (2013) Teaching thematic analysis: overcoming challenges and developing strategies for effective learning. The Psychologist, 26(2), 120-123. Lombardo, Emanuela, Meier, Petra, & Verloo, Mieke. (2009). Stretching and bending gender equality: a discursive politics approach. In E. Lombardo, P. Meier, & M. Verloo (Eds.), The Discursive Politics of Gender Equality: stretching, bending and policymaking (pp. 1-18). London: Routledge. Magalhães, Maria José. (1998). Movimento Feminista e Educação: Portugal, décadas de 70 e 80. Oeiras: Celta. Monteiro, Rosa Filomena Brás Lopes. (2013). Desafios e tendências das políticas de iguadade de mulheres e homens em Portugal. Estudos Feministas, 21(2), 535-552. Repo, Jemima. (2016). Gender equality as biopolitical governmentality in a neoliberal European Union. Social Politics, 23(2), 307-328.
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.