According to the Eurydice 2017 survey, civic education, which aims to educate active citizens who can contribute to social well-being (Nelson–Kerr, 2006), is part of the educational curricula in all countries. In connection with civic education, the role of socialisation both in the family and in school is also highlighted, as well as the models of preparation for public life and activities in local communities (Kaposi–Kalocsai, 2019), and which, according to the whole-school approach (Council of Europe, 2018), is implemented in three key areas of school life: teaching and learning methodology, the functioning and principles of school management, and cooperation with the community.

In Hungary, democratic civic education in schools started after the regime change, while society itself was also learning it. Its principles and objectives are set out in the National Core Curriculum, and a review of the content of the curriculum over the past thirty years shows that, regardless of the political and education policy orientation of the government in power, it has an important role in teaching democracy and active citizenship, reflects a modern approach, and is in line with international guidelines and priorities (Kaposi, 2019). Despite this, research on the practice and effectiveness of civic education in state-run schools shows that it is ineffective (Csákó, 2011; 2018), that schools operate in a way that is significantly different from the curriculum, and that democratic education is not embedded in everyday practice. The study, based on the whole-school approach, showed that among the pedagogical objectives, the development of critical thinking and the ability to express opinions rank last in the ranking of competences to be developed, the pedagogical methodological culture is characterised by frontal teaching methods and the transfer of knowledge, civic and democratic education is only integrated into the subject of history, students and parents can participate little or not at all in decision-making processes, and their opportunities to express their opinions are very limited. The functioning of student governments, although present in all schools, is formal and the school functions as a “sham democracy” (Kaposi, 2019), so students do not have the opportunity to experience democracy in school settings (Gáti, 2010).

After the regime change, state-run schools could not become a scene for genuine democracy and active citizenship education. Thanks to the liberalisation and pluralisation processes that followed the regime change, alternative private schools appeared in the early 1990s, and after 2011, when the government in power started its measures to re-unify and centralise pluralised education, a new alternative form of education, the learning community, appeared in public education as a possible way at the initiative of parents to “escape” from state-run education. Alternative schools are “official” schools that are partly independent from the state and operate with a significant financial contribution from parents (Langerné Buchwald, 2020), while learning communities are “unschooled schools” that are completely independent from the state. Considered as an organised form of home education, the latter provides education and training for students with private school status in an organised setting (Langerné Buchwald, 2019). Similarly to state-run schools, their educational activities are based on the national curriculum, but their operating principles, pedagogical activities and school practices differ significantly and in many areas. In this research, we set out to explore an area that has not been explored before, and based on the whole-school approach, we sought to answer the question of how active citizenship education is implemented in alternative schools and learning communities. This included a review of the teaching and learning methods applied, the organisation and management of the school, and the cooperation with the community, particularly parents.

Education for active citizenship prepares students for integration into society, but also builds the capacity for local social action and the political community to function. These educational goals are achieved both through conscious educational activities and through extra-curricular experiences, and the acquisition of social norms and attitudes in the school community, the latter being understood as the effect of the hidden curricula (Kiss, 2012). The research involved 10 alternative schools and 3 learning communities, and based on the foregoing, the research investigated the emergence of active citizenship education at the level of conscious educational activities, organisational functioning and cooperation with parents and the local community. To explore this, we analysed the official school documents of alternative schools—the school’s pedagogical programme and local curriculum, its organisational and operational regulations, its house rules, and the information provided on its website. In the case of learning communities, as they are not formal schools and therefore do not have such documents, the information provided on their website was included in the analysis, and semi-structured interviews were conducted with the school leaders and/or professional/educational representatives to complement the information obtained from the document and website analysis. On the other hand, we also investigated active citizenship education in areas beyond the curriculum and explored the elements that influence active citizenship education in the “hidden curricula” of alternative schools and learning communities, for which we also used semi-structured interviews. The aim of the document and website analysis and the interviews was to explore the extent to which students are given the opportunity to express their views, the extent to which they have the right to make and enforce rules, to decide on issues concerning classroom hours and the functioning of the school/student community, the prevailing teaching-learning and assessment methods, the extent to which and how the school/student community involves parents in decision-making processes, the extent to which and in what areas alternative schools/student communities involve parents and the local community in cooperation.

The results showed that the alternative schools and learning communities studied do not function as “sham democracies” but as a genuine democratic community of teachers, students, and parents. Their very organisational design supports this by understanding the groups that make up alternative schools and learning communities as micro-communities, and by seeking to map social diversity in their design. Social responsibility is reinforced by providing access to the school/student community through scholarship programmes, not only for wealthy families. Parents and students have the right to express their opinion and to take part in decision-making at the level of both the classroom hours and the organisation, and they attach great importance to the joint development of rules in cooperation with students. Instead of frontal classroom work, educational and teaching methods are predominantly used to develop the competences needed to become active citizens. Social responsibility is reinforced by organising extra-curricular and after-school activities such as volunteering to help the needy, or fundraising. The stages of cooperation with parents span the whole school/community: as the operation thereof requires a significant financial contribution from parents, and this maintainer role implies active participation in governance and decision-making. In both alternative schools and learning communities, cooperation with parents is of paramount importance for the education of the child, and the acceptance of pedagogical principles was identified as a prerequisite. In addition, parents are active participants in the daily life of the school and are often involved in education. Learning often takes place outside the school/student community (the wider and smaller environment, learning about the work of companies and organisations, visits to museums, walks, etc.), therefore keeping in touch and to cooperate with them is important with regards to the education of children.

Mihály Csákó (2011): Állampolgárokat nevel-e az iskola? In: Béla Bauer–Andrea Szabó (eds.): Arctalan (?) nemzedék. Ifjúság 2000−2010. National Institute for Family, Youth and Population Policy, Budapest. Mihály Csákó (2018): Politikai szocializáció serdülőkorban. Metszetek, 2018/3/1, 27-42. http://metszetek.unideb.hu/files/metszetek_201803_07_csako.pdf (09.01.2022) Eurydice (2012): Citizenship Education in Europe. Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency. Eurydice (2017): Citizenship Education at School in Europe 2017. Eurydice Report. Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency. Eurydice (2018): Citizenship Education at School in Europe 2018.. Eurydice Report. Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency. Annamária Gáti (2010): Aktív állampolgárság Magyarországon nemzetközi összehasonlításban. József Kaposi–Janka Kalocsai (2019): Tanítjuk vagy tanuljuk a demokráciát? Egy felmérés és tanulságai. Új Pedagógiai Szemle (69) 11–12. https://folyoiratok.oh.gov.hu/uj-pedagogiai-szemle/tanitjuk-vagy-tanuljuk-a-demokraciat (09.01.2022) József Kaposi (2019): A demokráciára nevelés aktuális kérdései. In Enikő Szőke-Milinte (ed.): Pedagógiai mozaik. Pázmány Péter Catholic University, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Budapest. http://kaposijozsef.hu/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Demokr%C3%A1ci%C3%A1ra-nevel%C3%A9s....pdf(09.01.2022) Mária Rita Kiss (2012): A fiatalok társadalmi és közéleti szerepekre való felkészítése itt és most (Preparing young people for social and public life here and now). Taní-tani Online http://www.tani-tani.info/a_fiatalok_tarsadalmi (11.01.2022) Judit Langer-Buchwald (2019). A tanulás új útjai: a tanulóközösségek (New ways of learning: learning communities). Új Pedagógiai Szemle (New Pedagogical Review), 69(5–6), 49–65 http://upszonline.hu/index.php?article=690506009 Judit Langer-Buchwald (2020): Az alternatív iskolák helyzetének változása a rendszerváltástól napjainkig. Iskolakultúra (School Culture), 30(1–2), 70–88 http://www.iskolakultura.hu/index.php/iskolakultura/article/view/32789 Nelson, J.–Kerr, D. (2006) Active citizenship in INCA countries: definitions, policies, practices and outcomes. Final Report. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, National Foundation for Educational Research. Reference framework of competences for democratic culture. Volume 1–3. Council of Europe, 2018.