E
C
N
E
R
E
F
G
N
N
I
COOCEED
PR
“GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
EDUCATION AND
THE SCHOOL CURRICULUM:
COMPARING POLICIES
AND BEST PRACTICES”
MILAN
13 - 14 SEPTEMBER
2010
Con il contributo
della Commissione Europea
Edited by
Chiara Paganuzzi
Texts by
Alicia Cabezudo, Francesco Cappelli,
Gherardo Colombo, Maurizio Gusso,
Daniela Invernizzi, Peter Mayo, Marina
Lazzati, Raffaela Milano, Chiara
Paganuzzi, Francesco Petrelli, Markus
Pirchner, Pietro Pinto, Anna Paola
Tantucci, Ana Santos, Justyna
Janiszewska, Laura Johnson, Marilena
Salvarezza
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank all the people
that have directly and indirectly made
the conference and
the proceedings possible, in particular:
Carlotta Bellomi, Francesca Bilotta,
Livia Giunti, Maria Grech, Elisabetta
Leonardi, Elena Scanu Ballona, Isabella
Tenti and Nicola Scognamiglio
Editing Italian and English Texts
Elena Scanu Ballona, Carlotta Bellomi,
Isabella Tenti, Chiara Paganuzzi
Design and layout
AC&P SRL | Aurelio Candido e Partners
Printed by
Edithink Srl - Rome
Published by
Save the Children Italia Onlus
Via Volturno, 58
00185 Rome - Italy
Save the Children Italia Onlus
Via Volturno 58 - 00185 Rome
tel +39 06 480 70 01
fax +39 06 480 70 039
[email protected]
E
C
N
E GS
R
E
F
CONCEEDIN
PRO
“GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
EDUCATION AND
THE SCHOOL CURRICULUM:
COMPARING POLICIES
AND BEST PRACTICES”
MILAN
13 - 14 SEPTEMBER
2010
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
s
t
n
e
t
n
Co
PREFACE
INTRODUCTION
PROGRAMME
PAPERS
Marina Lazzati The Role of Local Authorities in Promoting Global
Citizenship Education
Gherardo Colombo Rules, Society, Person
Francesco Petrelli Italy and the Proposals in the European Development
Education Consensus Document. How far Have We Got?
Anna Paola Tantucci Teacher training in the Global Citizenship Perspective:
Key Competences, Knowledge and Abilities within
European Documents and the Citizenship
and Constitutions Law Decree Guidelines
7
8
10
12
13
15
18
20
Markus Pirchner Local Authorities and Non-State Actors for Development:
the European Strategy to support Global Citizenship Education
25
Ana Teresa Santos The Portuguese National Strategy for Development Education:
a Participatory Approach
27
Alicia Cabezudo Peace, Democracy, Citizenship and Human Rights Education.
The Latin American Perspective
30
Peter Mayo Training Teachers on Global Issues: the Maltese Experience
Justyna Janiszewska Building a Multi-stakeholder Agreement on Development
Education in Poland
Laura Johnson Global Citizenship Education in the United Kingdom:
Policy and Practice
Pietro Pinto Towards a National System of Development Education in Italy
Daniela Invernizzi Global Citizenship Education through Practices
of Participatory Democracy at School
Maurizio Gusso Re-reading the Citizenship and Constitutions in the Light of
a new Solidarity between Global Education and School Subjects
Marilena Salvarezza Citizenship Research - Actions.
Francesco Cappelli A New Curriculum to Foster Inclusion in a Front-Line
School in Milan
34
37
40
47
51
54
57
58
5
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
e
c
a
Pref
Y
oung citizens are key players in the eradication of global poverty. Education
can and should empower children to make a difference in the fight against
poverty and to become actors for social change. The conference “Global
Citizenship Education and the School Curriculum: a Comparison Among
Policies and Best Practices” has offered an important opportunity for educational experts and practitioners to discuss issues on global citizenship
education within the school scenario. Global citizenship education gives
children the opportunity to develop critical thinking skills and to become aware of complex global
issues and challenges, such as the Millennium Development Goals. This is something that children of all ages need. Far from promoting one set of answers, global citizenship education
encourages children and young people to explore, develop and express their own values and
opinions, whilst listening to and respecting other people’s points of view. That is an important
step towards children and young people making informed choices as to how they exercise their
own rights and their responsibilities towards others.
Last but not least, recent research highlights that learning about global issues greatly increases
the proportion of the public who support the principle of overseas aid and stronger government
action to tackle poverty. Through the “Non-State Actors and Local Authorities in Development”
programme, the European Commission shows its commitment towards interventions aimed at
educating, raising awareness of global issues as well as mobilizing the European public. Engaging
and empowering European citizens, especially youngsters, is of paramount importance if we
want to make crucial contributions to fight the root causes of injustice and global poverty.
Raffaela Milano
Vice President
Save the Children Italy
7
n
o
i
t
c
u
d
o
r
t
In
GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
EDUCATION AND THE SCHOOL
CURRICULUM: COMPARING POLICIES
AND BEST PRACTICES
1
E
1
By Chiara Paganuzzi. She is the
coordinator of educational projects
in Lombardy for the Education and
School section of Save the Children
Italy.
2
Lisbon European Council 2000 and
2006 Report on the Progress towards
the 2010 Goals.
3
Among these the European Union
Council Resolution on Development
Education, 2001; the Maastricht
Declaration, 2002; the European
Conferences on Awareness Raising
and Development Education (2005
and 2006); the European Consensus
on Development Education, 2007.
4
Law n. 169 of 30.10.2008.
5
Educating to global citizenship.
Document by the Global Citizenship
Education Platform, 2010.
6
Culture, School, Person, Ministry of
Education, 2007; Guidelines
Document for Citizenship and the
Constitution, Ministry of Education,
2009.
8
ducation plays an important role in fostering a real social change. Not only
does it render personal development possible, but it can also contribute significantly to eradicate poverty and global injustices. On 13 and 14 September
2010 an International conference: “Global Citizenship and the School Curriculum: Comparing Policies and Best Practices”, was held at Palazzo Isimbardi, organized by Save the Children in collaboration with the Education
Department of the Milan Provincial Council.
This was the concluding event of a three-year project, promoted by Save the Children with the
contribution of the European Commission, which has fostered educational and participatory
programmes for adolescents and teachers through the use of new media. The United Nations
Millennium Development Goals and the Rights of the Child were the thematic and methodological core of the educational programmes proposed to the students and teachers. The conference
intended to find out how much global issues have become shared knowledge in school curricula and what methods can be used to promote real participation by adolescents at school and in
society. The papers by experts from different European and non-European countries contributed
in offering a wide overview on the role and importance of global citizenship education in schools
today.
The first day started with a session entitled “What Kind of School Policy in Italy for the Promotion of global citizenship education?”, that called for a discussion on the national school policy
and the measures taken, throughout the years, to foster global citizenship education. Policy makers and school staff have the responsibility to verify how far the school curriculum and consequently the skills, knowledge, values and behaviour fostered within the formal educational context, contribute to build a more human and sustainable future. Today, education, more than ever
before, demands a planetary dimension, supported by an ethos that can make children and adolescents understand those daily life phenomena that represent the intersecting point between
the local and global dimensions, and the effects of which go beyond the boundaries of the city
and of the country they live in. The conclusions of the Lisbon Strategy 2 on lifelong learning, as
well as the European Union’s 3, recommendations, the proclamation of the Decade of Education
for Sustainable Development (DESD) by the United Nations General Assembly (for the period
2005-2014) and finally the national legislation on school autonomy and the “Citizenship and the
Constitution” school subject, introduced by Law no. 169 4, offer starting points for an Italian
school curriculum capable of contributing to the building of a more equitable future that
respects human rights and the planet’s resources.
As is maintained by the Charter of Principles of the National Platform for Development Education 5, also presented during the conference, the Italian formal education system has taken into
account some suggestions resulting from this educational and legislative debate, and in some
guideline documents 6, has introduced recommendations to integrate themes oriented at fostering global citizenship in the school curricula. Law no. 169 of 2008, which introduces “Citizenship
and the Constitution” as a subject and the relative guideline document of 2009, which at the
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
7
Today several terms are used to
refer to global citizenship education
practices; the most common among
these are “Global Education” and
“Development Education”.
8
European Conference on
Awareness-Raising and
Development Education for NorthSouth, 2005; Helsinki Conference on
European Development Education,
2006.
9
The European Consensus on
Development: The contribution of
Development Education and
Awareness Raising
http://www.deeep.org/fileadmin/
user_upload/downloads/Consensus
_on_DE/DE_Consensus-EN.pdf.
This document forms an integral part
of the European Consensus on
Development, published in 2005.
http://ec.europa.eu/development/
icenter/repository/european_
consensus_2005_en.pdf.
10
The European Consensus on
Development: The contribution of
Development Education and
Awareness Raising, p. 13, 2007.
11
The European Consensus on
Development: The contribution of
Development Education and
Awareness Raising, p. 12, 2007.
12
As it will be introduced in
Francesco Petrelli’s paper Italy and
the Proposals in the European
Development Education Consensus
Document. What point have we
reached?, the multi-stakeholder
methods requires that different types
of stakeholders are involved in the
same process, as for example
institutional stakeholders (the
European Commission, the
European Parliament, the Member
States), civil society organizations,
Local Authorities.
13
This is the case in Portugal. In
Poland the process is still underway
and the strategy is in its definition
phase.
moment is the focus of the debate on the restructuring of Italian schools, confirms the importance of a school practice that aims at fostering citizenship education programmes and effective
participation activities. Educating for citizenship means supporting learning programmes aimed
at promoting knowledge, skills and languages that make children and adolescents capable of
exercising their rights. It also means fostering schools that can become laboratories of democracy, places where democracy can be enhanced.
The conference afternoon session, entitled “European and Non-European Policies and Practices:
a Comparison. The integration of Global Citizenship Education in the School Curriculum”, aimed
at sharing best practices of integration of global citizenship education 7 in formal education systems in European and non-European countries. On a European level several commitments and
documents have been signed to promote the recognition and integration of global themes in the
formal and informal curricula of educational systems. Such is the case, for instance, of the European Conferences on Awareness Raising and Development Education held between 2005 and
2006 8. During these events, the Members States participating in the conferences, undertook to
elaborate a national strategy of Development Education and awareness raising. In 2007, an
important document was published, “The European Consensus on Development Education” 9,
the result of the joint effort between the civil society representatives, the European Parliament,
the European Commission and the Member States of the Union. This document provides the
first strategy framework on European Development Education and Awareness Raising (DEAR). It
is an important declaration because it recognizes the significance of providing “policy, financial
and organizational support for the integration of Development Education and Awareness Raising
in formal and informal education systems [...] focusing on opportunities to engage formal and
informal educators and media personnel in the development of new projects and programmes,
networks, research [...] to play their part in responding to the challenges of poverty eradication
and sustainable development” 10. The document recommends that the governments of Member
States establish “structured and ongoing processes to develop long-term perspectives and shorter term collaborative programmes that promote Development Education and Awareness Raising
[...] also involving non-governmental development and other civil society organizations 11”. In
some countries of the Union, these European commitments and documents started off integration processes of global themes in the formal and informal educational systems. In Portugal and
in Poland, for example, multi-actor 12 working tables were launched which led to the development
of national strategies 13 in accordance with the principles of the European Consensus document.
The third session of the conference, entitled “A Comparison of National Practices”, aimed at sharing best practices of global citizenship education developed in Italy, particularly in Lombardy. The
focus was on the importance of a participatory and inclusive teaching approach which fosters
relationships between schools and the local territory, with all its emergencies, but also the multitude of experiences lived locally and globally, and which facilitates the interaction between the
formal and informal system, promoting networking and partnerships between different territorial subjects.
The papers in this publication are a summary of speeches at the conference and were written
and/or authorised by the authors themselves. We hope that the conference proceedings manage
to express the quality of the speeches and the discussions as well as the precious contribution of
each speaker. Finally, we thank all those who participated in the conference for the constructive
debate on a vital theme for the development of humanity that can fulfil ideals of peace, social justice and sustainability.
9
e
m
m
a
r
g
Pro
MONDAY 13 SEPTEMBER 2010
10,00 am
Opening and introduction: Raffaela Milano (Vice President of Save
the Children, Italy), Bruno Dapei (President of the Province Council,
Province of Milan), Maria Elena Milano (Presidency Directorate-General,
International Affairs, Region of Lombardy).
10,30 am - 1,00 pm
WHAT KIND OF SCHOOL POLICY IN ITALY
FOR THE PROMOTION OF GLOBAL
CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION?
Chairperson: Anna Paola Tantucci
(President of EIP Italy - École Instrument de Paix).
What Kind of Development Education to Promote Global
Citizenship Education?. Massimo Ghirelli (specialist at the Central
Technical Unit, Cooperation and Development Directorate-General,
Ministry of Foreign Affairs).
The Role of Local Authorities in Promoting Global Citizenship
Education. Marina Lazzati (Councillor for Education for
the Province of Milan).
Rules, Society, Person. Gherardo Colombo
(President of Garzanti Libri and ex magistrate).
Italy and the Proposals in the European Development
Education Consensus Document. How far Have We Got?
Francesco Petrelli (President of the Italian NGOs Association).
Teacher Training in the Global Citizenship Perspective: Key Competences,
Knowledge and Abilities within European Documents and
the Citizenship and Constitutions Law Decree Guidelines
Anna Paola Tantucci (President of EIP Italy - École Instrument de Paix).
1, 00 - 2,00 pm
Lunch Break
2,00 - 6,00 pm
EUROPEAN AND NON-EUROPEAN POLICIES AND
PRACTICES: A COMPARISON. THE INTEGRATION
OF GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION IN
THE SCHOOL CURRICULUM.
Chairperson: Chiara Paganuzzi (Coordinator of Education and School
Projects in Lombardy, Milan Office - Save the Children, Italy).
Local Authorities and Non-State Actors for Development:
the European Strategy to support Global Citizenship Education.
Markus Pirchner (Head of Sector “Non-State Actors”, EuropeAid,
European Commission).
Rethinking Education Programmes in the Light of Global Citizenship to
Support Sustainable Development. Philippe Pypaert (Programme
Specialist in Environmental Sciences, UNESCO).
10
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
The Portuguese National Strategy for Development Education:
a Participatory Approach. Ana Teresa Santos (Project Manager and
spokesperson for the Portuguese National Platform of NGOs), Portugal.
Glocal Education. Principles on Global Education and Citizenship.
Learning from the Latin American Experience. Alicia Cabezudo
(Professor at the University of Rosario and at the UPEACE - United
Nations University of Peace - Costa Rica), Argentina.
Training Teachers on Global Issues: the Maltese Experience.
Peter Mayo (Professor at the University of Malta), Malta.
Building a Multi-stakeholder Agreement on Development Education
in Poland. Justyna Janiszewska (President of the Education for
Democracy Foundation), Poland.
Global Citizenship Education in the United Kingdom:
Policy and Practice. Laura Johnson (Doctoral researcher at the IOE Institute of Education, University of London), Great Britain.
TUESDAY 14 SEPTEMBER 2010
9,00 am - 1,00 pm
A COMPARISON OF NATIONAL PRACTICES
AND ROUND TABLE.
Introduction: Francesca Bilotta (Coordinator of the Education and
School Area, Save the Children, Italy).
Chairperson: Elisabetta Leonardi (Italy-EU Programmes and Operations
Manager Programmes Department, Save the Children, Italy).
Towards a National System of Development Education in Italy.
Pietro Pinto (Spokesperson for the Development Education Platform of
the Italian NGOs Association).
Global Citizenship Education through Practices of Participatory
Democracy at School. Daniela Invernizzi (Specialist in Children Rights).
Re-reading the Citizenship and Constitutions in the Light of a New
Solidarity between Global Education and School Subjects. Maurizio
Gusso Maurizio Gusso (ELLIS Representative - Lombardy Network,
Citizenship Education, Literature and Music, Languages, History and
Geography Studies, and President of IRIS - Teaching and interdisciplinary
research of history).
Citizenship Research - Actions. Marilena Salvarezza (PMS Coordinator Portare il Mondo a Scuola).
A New Curriculum to Foster Inclusion in a Front-Line School in Milan.
Francesco Cappelli (Casa del Sole Primary School Headmaster).
What Idea of Citizenship to Support Peace and Human Rights
Education? Luca Bicocchi (Coordinator of research and training
activities, Legal Unit, Save the Children, Italy). Mohamed Abdalla
Tailmoun (Spokesperson for Rete G2).
11
I
n
o
i
s
s
e
S
WHAT KIND
OF SCHOOL POLICY
IN ITALY FOR
THE PROMOTION
OF GLOBAL
CITIZENSHIP
EDUCATION?
12
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
MaRINa
LazzatI
councillor
for Education
and School
conStruction
Milan Provincial
council
arina Lazzati is a councillor for Education - School construction of the Province of Milan.
M
Started as an employee in the family textile business in San Vittore Olona (MI), later became personnel manager, sales manager and safety manager. Board member of a textile company
in the Como area, part of the family textile group, where she is responsible for relations with suppliers, safety in the company and selection of eco-friendly products and materials, which do not
harm the environment and people. First female president of the Group of young entrepreneurs
of the Legnano industry association, vice-president from 1991 to 1995 and member of the Association Council since 2006. Mayor of Cerro Maggiore (MI) in 1995, reconfirmed for the second
mandate 1999-2004. Candidate in the 2004 Province elections for the Legnano constituency and
in the European Elections of 2004 and 2009 for the North-West constituency.
THE ROLE OF LOCAL AUTHORITIES
IN PROMOTING GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
EDUCATION
I would like to take the opportunity to thank Save the Children, who we are working with at the
moment to present initiatives aimed at promoting intercultural socialization and opposing prejudice within schools.We believe that in Milan, a Province with a high rate of foreign pupils in secondary schools (10.7% Cisem source), it is important to experiment new approaches and new ways of
intervention to offer foreign youngsters as well as all other students, the opportunity to reflect,
together with the teachers, on issues concerning citizenship, rights and human society. We wish to
develop workshops on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, where the various issues
related to childhood rights, particularly the right to education will be analysed. Our action will also
include family support activities aimed at helping parents of foreign minors to face problems related to immigration and integration processes and at facilitating relationships with the school.
School is the most appropriate place that can provide the necessary knowledge, tools and skills
to help young people and adults become aware citizens, capable of participating in a country’s
social and political life, within a context that is becoming increasingly complex. It is important for
young people to acquire a better understanding of the different cultures in order to learn to
appreciate them and develop solidarity and supporting attitudes towards others.
The Education Department is particularly sensitive to school integration and inclusion issues,
considering the number of foreign students in our schools. The survey carried out by Cisem, the
research agency for the Milan Provincial Council, shows that between the scholastic years 2006/7
and 2009/10 there was an increase of about 3% in the number of foreign students, from 7.5% to
10.7%. So, for quite some years we have been organizing and promoting activities in this field, in
collaboration with the various social organizations that deal with student education and welfare
in the territory.
In order to positively support the integration process of foreign citizenship pupils attending secondary schools, the Education Department of Milan supported the “Non uno di meno. Ragazzi
e ragazze stranieri nell’istruzione superiore” project (Not a single one less. Foreign girls and boys
in secondary school), which received a 330,000 euro fund from the Home Office, coming from
the European Fund for the Integration of Third-country nationals, for the current scholastic year.
The project activities aim at guaranteeing the right of foreign adolescents to education, opposing non-completion of school and developing an integration process based on mutual knowledge of the history and traditions of the students attending our schools.
The project activities are structured in 7 actions:
• ELLEDUE - Italian L2 workshop
Experimental and innovative teaching of Italian, particularly for students who have immigrated recently. The Italian L2 courses are held in different periods: during the scholastic year, in
summer and before school starts.
13
on I
sessi
• Teacher training and exchange of best practices
Training sessions for school directors, teachers, educators and caretakers.
• “Dedicated” site
A continuously updated website (www.provincia.milano.it/scuola/nonunodimeno and
www.centrocome.it) dedicated to the project is available, where the project’s teaching material is published to facilitate the integration process of foreign students for the benefit of the
whole community.
• Orientation
The project also gives a lot of attention to school orientation and to choices related to the continuation of studies both for foreign youths already living in Italy and for new arrivals (and their
families).
• Counselling service for schools
Counselling and information service for teachers and school personnel - both distance and
face-to-face counselling - on subjects such as: planning of actions and learning activities in multicultural classes, suggestions for books and teaching materials, availability of resources and
tools, rules and regulations.
• Linguistic and cultural mediation
Availability of expert cultural mediators particularly in relationships with the families.
• Intercultural education for everyone
Apart from actions specifically aimed at foreign students, the project also promotes intercultural exchange actions and events (exhibitions, competitions, research) for all the students, to
prevent and oppose any form of discrimination or racism. Among these, there is, for example,
the research study on the idea and representation of Italian citizenship by the youths who have
applied for naturalization or who have become new citizens, which was realized last year in collaboration with the State University of Milan: E. Colombo, L. Domaneschi, C. Marchetti “Una
nuova generazione di Italiani. L’idea di cittadinanza tra i giovani figli di immigrati” (A new generation of Italians. The idea of citizenship among the young children of immigrants) ed. Franco Angeli 2009.
This year, the publication “Passaporto per l’Italia. Educazione alla cittadinanza e alla Costituzione per ragazzi stranieri” (Passport for Italy. Citizenship and Constitution Education for foreign children) was presented. This text is for foreign children and adolescents who want to
become Italian citizens and want to learn our rules, history and traditions. It is written in clear
and simple language for easier comprehension. This is integration for who wants to become part
of a society that wants to include him.
14
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
GhERaRDO
COLOMbO
herardo Colombo was a magistrate and a judge of the Criminal Court of Milan. He was an
G
examining magistrate and part of the examining commission in important trials against
organized crime. He was an observer - on behalf of the International Society of Social Defence in the commission of experts for the international cooperation for the search and confiscation of
illegal profit. He was also consultant for the investigating parliamentary commission on terrorism
in Italy and consultant for the investigating parliamentary commission on the mafia. Was Public
Prosecutor at the Public Prosecutor’s Office in Milan, and contributed greatly in the investigations
and trials related to the “Mani pulite” operation. In March 2005 he was nominated Councillor of
the Supreme Court of Appeal. After resigning from magistrate, he committed himself to legality
education in schools through meetings with students all over Italy, and precisely for this activity
he was awarded the Peace Culture National Prize 2008. In September 2009 he was nominated
president of the Garzanti Libri publishing house.
RULES, SOCIETY, PERSON
I believe that to discuss this theme, we have to try and clearly understand the meaning of the
words we use. I will therefore start with the word “legality” to then get to the definition of the
concept of “global citizenship”.
Legality means “respecting the law”. It is, therefore, a neutral word and its content refers to something different, to the term “law”. However, laws, in turn, can have any content. For example, in
1938, in Italy, racist laws were enacted; these laws have a meaning that is contrary to article 3 of
our Constitution, which says that “ all citizens are equal before the law”, irrespective of their personal conditions. Moreover, until the 1946 elections, in Italy, the law established that only men
could vote and that laws were therefore made only by men, even though both men and women
had to obey them. It was the contrary of what happens today in many countries. Laws, therefore,
can have any content. If we resort to the term “law” for help, how can we know what value to
attribute to the word “legality”? In Italy, once, it was legal to observe racist laws. Italy was a “legal”
country if racist laws were observed, if women accepted the fact that only men could vote. The
term “legality”, at the time, meant exactly the opposite of what it means today.
It is appropriate, at this point, to wonder where we can trace the value of this word. Perhaps it is
necessary to refer to another concept, to the concept of “justice”. We usually say: “This law is
just”, “This law is unjust”. “Justice” is the word that defines the meaning of the concepts of “law”
and “legality”; but even “justice” is an ambiguous word. Because when slavery existed, when
women did not vote, when children could study only if they came from a certain social class, what
did the word “justice” mean? At the time, justice meant “protection and defence of discrimination”. Once again the contrary of what we mean today (according to the Constitution, but also
according to the common general idea, “equality”, or “equity”, “mutual respect”).
How can we define the meaning of the word “legality”, if not even the word “justice” can be
referred to? How can we understand when the word “legality” has a positive meaning and when
it has a negative meaning? I think that the way is following: let us ask ourselves how is it that,
today, “justice” in the Constitution means “equality”. When, in history, did this word change its
meaning? If we look back at history and we simplify and summarize facts, we see that the social
organization pattern has always been pyramid-like: those at the top command, those at the bottom obey; those at the top “can”, those at the bottom “have to”. This model of social organization resisted, at least, until some time before the 1946 elections in Italy, when women were
excluded from voting. The system changed only then. We can agree upon the fact that, in Italy,
the change took place, on a legal plane, when the Constitution entered into effect on 1 January
1948 and, on the recommendation plane, the same year, on 10 December 1948, with the proclamation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Why did the idea of organizing society horizontally, on the basis of equal opportunities (equality), and not vertically occur then? I think that
to answer we have to reflect on what happened before 1948.
On 2 June 1948, Italian women and men decided together, for the first time, whether to live in a
republic or in a monarchy and they elected those who would write the Constitution. Just before,
there had been a world war, with a death toll of 55 million, the Shoah, the atomic bomb. In our
personal experience the atomic bomb is an acquired fact, because it already existed when we
were born, but for those living then, it represented a crucial change of perspective. To destroy a
15
on I
sessi
city, hundreds of aeroplanes loaded with tons of bombs had to leave, drop the bombs, come
back to reload, leave again, drop the bombs again and so on. In the meantime, a lot of people
could survive by taking shelter in cellars and, if they survived the first bombing, by abandoning
the city and escaping to the countryside. With the atomic bomb everything changed: a button is
pressed, a bomb is dropped, the city is destroyed and all those who are there are dead. Just think
of the change of perspective; consider these things all together. As soon as humanity could stop
for a moment and look back, the first question it asked itself (as emerges from the preamble to
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) was: “How can we prevent all this from happening
again?” The solution humanity chose was to stop organizing society hierarchically and to set out
from the assumption that all the people living on this planet are equally important. It was an antidote, an attempt to exorcize the suffering experienced so far. If everybody is equally important,
the disasters, that had taken place so far, cannot be repeated.
Putting it very simply, our Constitution is like a triangle: at the top there is “equal importance
and everybody’s dignity”, at the base, the first corner represents article 2, that states “the
Republic recognizes and guarantees the inviolable rights of man” (obviously they are the inviolable rights “of the person”, whoever it might be, but the Constituent Assembly was still
influenced by the mind-set of the time and it used the word “man” instead of “human”). This
provision recognizes everybody’s fundamental rights, irrespective of whether a person is
born in our country or not, whether he happens to be here by chance, or whether he remains
here only temporarily. The other corner of the base represents article 3, whereby all citizens
are equal before the law, irrespective of any personal characteristic: sex, race, political ideas,
religion, social and personal conditions. This means that everybody has the same opportunities. So, the triangle is made up of the person, rights, equal opportunities: the rest of the Constitution is aimed at realizing the triangle.
Unfortunately, however, society has always organized itself as though it were a pyramid, with
those few at the top who can do everything and the mass population at the bottom that can do
nothing. It is difficult to break away from old mind-sets (which very often are presented as new,
but are in fact the oldest ones). Such mind-sets render life based on the recognition of global citizenship and of equality among human beings impossible. There is a lot of resistance to surmounting old mind-sets. For example, it took 27 years, from 1948 (when the Constitution came
into effect) to 1975, to change the part of the civil code that provided that the husband was the
head of the family and that the woman had to follow him wherever he deemed fit to establish
the matrimonial home. The article is even entitled “marital authority”, thus establishing the husband’s authority over the wife. Then again, today, there is still a lot of resistance to the recognition of global citizenship.
In a society where equal opportunities are not guaranteed, people do not recognize each other.
Those at the top think they are different from those at the bottom and the model becomes quite
simple, one commands and the others obey. Social organization is resolved in this way. On the
contrary, if everybody is free, if everybody has the same dignity, organizing society is more complex. For this reason very often short-cuts are taken and we go towards a vertical society even
when laws state the contrary.
Generally, it is thought that as the vertical and hierarchical form of society has always existed,
thinking of building global citizenship is a utopian idea. However, a lot of utopian dreams have
been realized throughout the course of history, the last one in the first half of the twentieth century! Until almost the end of the previous century, there was not even one country where
women could vote at political elections. The first nation where universal suffrage was introduced
was New Zealand, in 1893. All the other countries followed after the beginning of the 20th century. Isn’t this a realization of a utopian dream? Let us imagine going back in time, to the 18th century, and interviewing a girl from that time and telling her that in two centuries’ time laws would
not be made by the Prince, the King, the Emperor, the Pope, but by people chosen by everyone,
including women. How do we think the girl would have answered us? That we were out of our
mind! The same thing applies to slavery and human sacrifice, the former one now abolished, the
latter an abandoned practice... a lot of utopian ideas have been realized throughout the centuries!
Another obstacle along the road towards a horizontal society concerns the relation with liberty.
This regards choice: who is free chooses, who is not cannot choose. Choice is followed by
responsibility; liberty is very appealing, but responsibility does not seem to be very bearable and
very often it is transferred to others. But we do not realize that responsibility is inexorably linked
16
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
to liberty. If we transfer liberty to others, we contribute, in a determining manner, to the recreation of a vertical society, subjecting ourselves to whoever takes responsibility (and liberty).
A society that wants to reach global citizenship requires its people to be able and want to discern
and distinguish; to want to make decisions. Those who are not able and do not want to make
decisions need someone to choose for them, like a mother. It could be the boss, the market, the
media. I believe that the only road towards global citizenship is that of growing up, becoming
adults, facing the challenge to decide and committing oneself. It is vital to change one’s attitude,
to overcome the prejudices that thwart recognition of others. An example: how many disputes
between flat owners end up before the judge? If there is no recognition even among flat owners,
it is difficult to recognize people coming from different countries and cultures! It has been very
difficult, and still is today, for the North and the South of Italy to recognize each other. Around
fifty years ago, there were no foreign immigrants, but there were those who were called in a
derogatory tone, “terroni” (country bumpkins or clod-hoppers). Fifty, sixty years ago, the natives
did not recognize the Italians who emigrated to the United States of America. The Immigration
Commission referred to them using the same words that are used today to refer to those who
arrive here. It is the resistance to recognition of others that bars the way to global citizenship. If
we were able to emancipate ourselves, to grow up, to discern, we might manage to choose, to
discern even in the information sphere. It is true that traditional media very often try to steer
opinions, but I believe that it is also true that human beings in western society have never been
as free as they are today to find information. So, to get adequate information one has to make an
effort: it is difficult, but possible.
A society where everybody is important is a society that requires effort. Article 1 of the Constitution states: “Italy is a democratic Republic founded on work”. “Founded on work” means that if
there is no effort, there is no Republic and no democracy. Work means struggle, if we do not
make an effort, if we do not struggle, it is impossible to reach any goal. If citizens do not live
democracy, if they do not make an effort, it will transform into a monarchy technically, that is, a
government for a single person, where the one who commands is changed every five years, but
to whom every decision is transferred for five years, while the others just watch. To reach global
citizenship, everybody’s effort is necessary, and as “everybody” is made up by each and every
one of us, global citizenship can be realized by putting into practice the meaning of four words:
clarity, coherence, commitment and participation First of all, things have to be thought over,
understood; then one has to be coherent with what was understood; commit oneself, not avoid
one’s responsibilities and move on towards universal recognition; go through this process with,
and not separated from others.
17
on I
sessi
FRaNCESCO
PEtRELLI
rancesco Petrelli, born in 1961 and has been working for Non-Government Organizations
F
since 1992. He specialized in education and training activities for students, teachers, association members and in the information and awareness campaigns on development. From 1998 to
2003 he was President of the Formin International Training Centre. Later he collaborated with
the Centre of International Political Studies (CeSPI) and the Interregional Observatory for Development Cooperation. Since 2005 he has been president of the UCODEP NGO in Arezzo, (OxfamItalia since august 2010). He is board member of the CONCORD DARE FORUM (Developing Education and Awareness Raising Forum). He has been President of the Association of Italian NGOs
since March 2010. He lectures in some graduate and post-graduate master courses at the University “La Sapienza” in Rome, the Bicocca University and the State University in Milan, and in courses by the ISPI Institute. He is co-author of “Lavorare nella cooperazione internazionale”(SEI,Torino), and he collaborated for a few years in the production of the “Social Watch” report on social
development in the world.
ITALY AND THE PROPOSALS
IN THE EUROPEAN DEVELOPMENT
EDUCATION CONSENSUS
DOCUMENT. HOW FAR HAVE
WE GOT?
It is worthwhile talking to you of how we can use the “European Development Education Consensus” document 15 (published at the end of 2007) which gives the first strategic framework on
Development Education and Awareness Raising in Europe. This is an important document
because it is the result of a joint effort by civil society, the European Parliament, the European
Commission and the Member States of the Union.
15
http://www.deeep.org/
fileadmin/user_upload/downloads/
Consensus_on_DE/DE_ConsensusEN.pdf.
18
Before introducing the document, I would like to mention an important matter, which cannot be
neglected by whoever is responsible for education today, in a world characterized by the fast
processes of transformation produced by globalization, interdependence and by the sense of disorientation that such processes provoke in the educational and social models. I think that an
effective consideration should start off from the breakdown of most of the paradigms that characterized the history of the past century. It has been said that the Constitution is a consequence
of Auschwitz and Hiroshima, which as the historian Eric J. Hobsbawm maintains have been the
“symbol” and the point of no return of the so-called “short twentieth century”. For the first time
in history, man reached a level of destructive power that managed to interrupt the course of history and of the future; he acquired power that equated him to a god of the apocalypse and
destruction. Today we are facing another breakdown of a well-established paradigm: the paradigm that can briefly be defined by the term “security”, in the sense of inevitable certainty of
progress, improvement, expansion of welfare. What is the real concept of security? Today the
heart of the matter lies in the fact that, for the first time, today’s thirty-year-olds are reasonably
convinced that they are living in worse conditions and have less possibilities than their parents
had. After the Second World War, this fact has been the strongest cause of rupture of mental
prospects that has significantly affected our work and the work of any educator. Those who grew
up in the 60s and 70s, like my generation, had a different perception of the world. They were the
years of reaching space, landing on the moon. We grew up with the idea that science would have
brought about progress and that progress meant improvement of our welfare and that this would
have been the certain condition of our existence. This period of trust and positiveness was gradually interrupted during the last thirty years, ever since the problem of limitedness of resources
started to clearly emerge. We can summarize this topic in this way: our production model, our
ways of consuming and our way of life does not provide “enough for everyone”. It is a complex
problem which relates access to resources and their distribution, preservation of common assets
essential for the continuation of life on the planet to democracy and regards the principles con-
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
tained in our Constitution. I am convinced that we are either able to solve the problem of the
concept of global security, how it should actually be interpreted, or our educational attempts will
have the mere function of affirmations. We are either able to fight a strong cultural battle that will
change the common opinion, the “mainstreaming” or our actions will be a minority. I am also
deeply convinced, for example, that an extraordinary instrument for global citizenship education
would be taking the first twenty fundamental articles of the Italian Constitution and the deep and
modern political and cultural debate, that produced them in our constituent assembly sixty years
ago, to all the schools, using adequate tools and languages depending on the scholastic levels.
Those articles are the result of the breaking down of a historical paradigm brought about by the
Second World War and by a reconsideration of the world, of the role and rights of single citizens,
of new responsibilities towards the human community.
The European Development Education Consensus document is useful if used as a work tool and
not only as a reference document. Consensus documents are guidelines which the European
Union (and not just the European Commission) adopts to direct its political choices and its
resources. What is relevant, in the Consensus document, to Development Education and Awareness Raising, or rather, what in Europe is referred to by the acronym DEAR (Development Education and Awareness Raising)?
The first element I am interested in pointing out is that this document is an integral part of the
more general 2005 European Consensus document on development policies which lays out the
general guidelines on this topic 16. This means that development education (which in the document is still referred to in this way, but today we prefer to speak of Global Education or Global
Citizenship Education) and the activities connected to it are an integral and inevitable part of it.
In the “Development Education Consensus” document, it is explicitly highlighted that education,
training and correlated activities do not constitute the promotion of development cooperation
projects (which is not a foregone acquisition within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and for the
current Minister).
The second important element regards the multi-stakeholder method, which is at the basis of
the work that led to the document, thanks to the contribution of the various social and institutional stakeholders involved. The multi-stakeholder method requires that different types of stakeholders are involved in the same process, as for example institutional stakeholders (the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Member States), civil society organizations,
Local Authorities. The latter, in particular, have acquired a particularly important role, thanks to
their ability of promoting organization and development processes capable of creating cooperation between territories and local communities.
A third element I consider important to highlight is consensus. Tomorrow an international solidarity Barometer will be presented by FOCSIV 17, which contains some very significant data collected through an inquiry-survey carried out on a national level, in collaboration with the important institute DOXA. And I can disclose some of its salient data. About 45% of Italians, even today,
in times of crisis, believe that the development cooperation funds should not be decreased and
consider that a decrease in national military expenditure would be a good strategy for raising the
necessary financial resources. Consensus, therefore, goes hand in hand with the cultural battle,
the changing of trends, of the common opinion within our society. This is what we have to work
on to gauge the effectiveness of our actions.
16
http://ec.europa.eu/development/
icenter/repository/european_
consensus_2005_en.pdf.
17
http://www.focsiv.org/
abbonati/documenti/Barometro
1999.pdf.
Moreover, I would like to recall the common principles that are identified in the document: working n partnership, promoting different opinions and perspectives, stimulating analogies between
the North and the South, contributing to research activities and learning some lessons from
them, sharing experiences and judgements. Through this approach and these methods the public should not simply be the receiver of our actions, but should become the main actor. The
involvement of more stakeholders and the need of coordination are fundamental principles of a
methodological and operative nature. But it is also essential to critically raise the issue of the terminology used in the document. The word development today should be reconsidered because
the term is not neutral and can be interpreted in different ways. It is important to define it and
clarify its connotation because words have meanings and a precise historical and cultural context.
19
on I
sessi
I believe that, as educators, we also have to consider the terminology problem. For example, the
distinction between a North and a South of the world is outdated and does not explain the real
situation. The real theme that has to be tackled is the fight against poverty and social exclusion
(which is a cause and an effect of poverty) in our North as well as in the South of the world. We
should rather deal with and talk about the global social issue, which appears in new forms. Poverty is everywhere and has taken on an ageographical nature: it’s present in the United States, as
Amartya Sen says in a famous essay, in as much as life expectancy of women in Kerala, India is
higher than that of women in black communities in the suburbs of Los Angeles. The fight against
poverty and social exclusion is also an issue in suburbs of big cities and it is also the tool that
forces us to give an answer to questions like: “why initiate programmes for development cooperation, public help, decentralized cooperation, today, in times of crisis?” It is not an agenda
problem, but a mindset problem.
So, what is the real issue to tackle? It is, without doubt, the fight against poverty and exclusion, a
big global social issue but also the problem of our development. Faced with globalization
processes, which seem to overshadow the possibility of anything being done by single citizens
or communities, the possible answers, I believe are two: the first is the evident connection that
globalization creates between the local-national dimension and the international one; the second
is the responsibility of the single citizens and the communities.
aNNa PaOLa
taNtuCCI
rofessor Anna Paola Tantucci is the national president of E.I.P. (Ecole Instrument de Paix
P
Italy), she is an expert at the Ministry of Education, University and Research and at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; commission member of several Italian ministries and of European organizations (DARE- NECE, ecc). The E.I.P. (Ecole Instrument de Paix) is an ONG specialized in the field
of human rights, peace and citizenship. It was founded in Geneva in 1967 and is present in 40
countries around the world It was founded in Italy in 1972 where it acts as a consultancy body for
the Ministry of Education, University and Research. It is a state authorized training body, permanent member of the Human Rights Observatory of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. UNESCO and
the Council of Europe recognize E.I.P Italy and has a special consultative status at the UN. It is a
permanent consultant for democratic citizenship education at the Council of Europe and it has a
national network of 1065 state schools and state authorized schools of all levels.
TEACHER TRAINING IN A GLOBAL
CITIZENSHIP PERSPECTIVE: KEY
COMPETENCES, KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS
IN EUROPEAN DOCUMENTS AND
IN THE GUIDELINES FOR CITIZENSHIP
AND CONSTITUTION EDUCATION
18
Cogan, J., Derricott, R. Citizenship
for the 21st Century. An
International Perspective on
Education, Kogan Page, London,
1998.
20
Like all the terms used to refer to political and social life, the term “citizenship” is far from having a stable and universally accepted meaning. It is now widely acknowledged that it is a multifaceted concept. This has significant consequences on the key competences of global citizenship
education. A historical approach shows beyond doubt that the assertion and extension of the
term “global citizenship related to fundamental human rights” constitutes the common thread
of the theoretical concepts elaborated by international organizations, primarily the European
Council from its foundation to more recent developments. By observing that Citizenship Education for the 21st century calls for “a more holistic approach marked by comprehensiveness and
consistency in both depth and breadth”, Cogan and Derricott 18, the English scholars who have
dealt with the citizenship education issue, formulated a multidimensional citizenship model
around aims such as:
• Approaching problems as members of a global society.
• Taking responsibility.
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
• Understanding and appreciating cultural differences.
• Critical thinking.
• Willingness to resolve conflicts in a non-violent manner.
• Changing one’s lifestyle to protect the environment.
• Being sensitive towards human rights.
• Participation in politics at local, national and international levels.
Such global citizenship education models can be defined as holistic. The researchers suggest
transversality on various levels: in determining the different citizenship dimensions, in integrating the cognitive and the behavioural levels, and finally in considering the spatial and temporal
categories. Such projects aim at developing attitudes that can perceive the unity of human society and global relationships, encouraging the faculty of forming opinions and making decisions
as members of global society.
“Citizenship and Constitution” is taught in Italian schools with the aim of reinforcing, among
younger generations, a human society culture inspired by the principles of our Constitution, a
text that is unanimously considered as a source of values able to guide younger generations, “a
lay bible” as President Ciampi defined it.
The 169/2008 law also suggests the regional statutes among the contents to study. This is a right
suggestion given the fact that regional authorities will keep gaining more power as devolution
sets in. More important are the international documents, the European Charter, which will
become a Constitution and the noteworthy cultural elaboration that keeps taking place both in
the Council of Europe (where currently 47 member states are represented) and the European
Union (currently 27 member states), namely the European Parliament, the Commission and the
Council of Ministers.
Preparing young people to grow up as citizens aware of their rights and responsibilities is also a
school’s duty. Exercising democracy is a right/duty which has to be learnt and practiced day by
day from a very young age. It is always about belonging to a community, which involves politics
and rights, especially political rights. In this sense, a citizen is always a “fellow citizen”, a person
who lives with others. Such a community is defined, mainly, on two levels: on one hand, the local
level, the city, often in the urban sense, where people live, to which they belong; on the other
hand the State, which requires a national belonging with the consequent granting of full rights
to its members.
Moreover, we believe that effective teaching should also present, in an honest way, objections
and alternatives (e.g. antidemocratic and anti liberal theories, racist and capital punishment ideologies) and above all the many controversial problems (stimulate reflection on, e.g. the complex connection between freedom and safety or the difficulty of being tolerant with intolerant
people). The aim, however, should always be having students assimilate and practice such values. It is necessary to distinguish very clearly between the “cognitive” goals (those that can be
verified and are therefore assessable) and the “formative” ones (those that can be observed over
time, but are not subject to school assessment). Citizenship education, which in our school system is referred to as “Citizenship and Constitution”, aims at transmitting values and behaviour
rules, however values and behaviours cannot be assessed with school grades. We cannot grade a
pupil as insufficient because he is antidemocratic or racist; we can only expect he knows the history and reasons of democracy. We, therefore, assess only the cognitive goals (through objective
tests, usually written tests, because oral assessment is arbitrary and approximate), using criteria
that should be clear to the student and the teacher right from the very beginning. The “formative” goals (respecting rules, spreading an active and aware citizenship culture) are the guiding
star, the direction to follow, the hope that accompanies and supports our work. Citizenship education presupposes:
• That citizenship is a goal that still has to be reached, or rather that the process for acquiring
citizenship (a concept that cannot be defined once and for all, but is subject to evolution
depending on the changes in process within societies) is still underway.
• That in order to reach the goal of aware citizenship, which is the basis of active participation
in the life of a country inspired by democratic principles, there has to be the will to invest in
this sphere of youth and adult education.
• Not only knowledge, but also in-dept analysis of the society transformations in the particular
historical phase we are living in, aware of the “problems” related to open issues and interested in tackling them to find suitable solutions.
21
on I
sessi
• That minds are free of prejudice (in the sense of preconceived judgements, rather than distorted ones), of the temptation to resort to anachronistic and/or ahistorical models and more
inclined to a historical interpretation of the problems because “the future has an ancient heart”
as Carlo Levi maintained (1956).
Therefore, if aware citizenship is a goal that, to a large extent, still has to be achieved, the problems education has to deal with, create problems for the teachers that have to be overcome, but
also offer opportunities to broaden horizons, enhance the whole community’s culture and renovate the models on which social life is organized. The issues regarding this theme, the ways to
interpret it and the possible ways to deal with it are diverse.
Schools are greatly involved in this “educational” process and the accomplished experiences at
various levels and in different European Union countries are clear and important evidence and
examples to follow, because they directly concern all of us as “citizens of the present”. School
subjects must all have the same value and importance, the same epistemological value throughout school life, while teaching methods change according to the scholastic level and subject areas
and their fundamental characteristics are defined by the subject associations for teachers.
In relation to knowledge processing, skills become mental structures and school subjects should
be rethought within the relationship between the epistemological statute and the educational
goals of the secondary school course of studies. As the development of citizenship knowledge
and skills is not just the responsibility of the “Citizenship and Constitution” subject, but also the
result of contributions by other subjects in the curriculum (e.g. communication skills), the guidelines document, issued by the Ministry of Education (MIUR), emphasises the need of integration
with other subjects and encourages schools to identify the contribution which each school subject could/should give to the development of such skills. It seems extremely important for
schools to:
• Update the academic programme, as regards contents and curricula structuring, training of
teaching and non-teaching staff, student orientation towards adult life choices.
• Render schools active participants in local territorial evolution, an area in which students’
personalities can be successfully developed.
• Train citizens in a European dimension, both as regards the social and cultural dimension
and as regards commodities and work markets.
• Administer as best possible available resources and increase them in quantity, variety and
quality.
As regards this point, how can these projects contribute to the teachers’work? I believe they
could help us to:
• Not restrict the goals of Civic/Citizenship Education to just the cognitive component (knowledge and skills).
• Specify better which are the priority areas of knowledge and skills for Civic/Citizenship Education (the study of the Constitution, as we have said on several occasions is fundamental not
only because it represents a shared patrimony which all citizens should “know”, but also
because the Constitution gives us reference points and fundamental values that belong to our
society and to democratic societies in general).
• Acknowledge the complexity and difficulties of Civic/Citizenship Education, but also its
resources (schools and teachers should be able to tackle these resources as well as the difficulties that come with them).
• Identify, starting from this complexity, the schools’ possible grounds of research and reflection.
19
Brett, P., Mompoint-Gaillard, P.,
Salema, M. H. How all teachers can
support citizenship and human
rights education: a framework for
the development of competences,
Editions du Conseil de l’Europe,
2009.
22
In this process, it appears of utmost importance to support, motivate and enhance teachers’ professional skills, both as cultural mediators and as promoters of teaching dynamics and assessors
of their results, by training them to use a teaching/learning method that is aware of the connections and interactions that develop when teaching peace and active citizenship education. This
is because such topics represent a fundamental aspect of growing up for every student to develop an aware and active commitment within the present society 19.
The other important aspect for autonomous schools is planning through networking or in partnership. As article 7 of the Teaching and Organizational Autonomy Regulation states: network culture implies the will to “put yourself to the test” and considers partnerships or networks as instruments and ways of implementation.
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
The central focus is on the educational and formative opportunities that network or partnership
consortium planning offer autonomous schools in pursuing students’ global formation towards
a new way of being, living and acting.
The principle of collaboration among public subjects constitutes an integral part of Law no.
59/97: in particular, article 21 provides that organizational autonomy should aim at coordination
with the territorial context. The Regulations for the implementation of school autonomy stipulate that schools have to “interact together and with local institutions” (Art.1) and that the headmaster should “create the necessary relationships with the local authorities and with the various
cultural, social and economic institutions working in the territory (Art. 3).
“Networking represents a connection principle between institutions that is necessary to overcome isolation, repetition of actions and situations, which are more effective if carried out
together. The principle of networking entails a model of action which provides services through
coordinated tasks, a communicating system between different levels, a system that aims at integration as an ameliorative quality for everyone, the providers of the services and the users” 20.
20
Cecinelli, E., Tantucci A. P. Europa
ludens - Educare alla cittadinanza
europea attraverso la didattica
ludica e le nuove tecnologie: kit
didattico, manuale per i docenti in
quattro lingue “(italiano, inglese,
francese, spagnolo) + Cdrom di
giochi didattici interculturali in
quattro lingue (italiano, inglese,
francese, spagnolo), Molfetta: La
Meridiana, 2010.
23
I
I
n
o
i
s
s
e
S
EUROPEAN
AND NON-EUROPEAN
POLICIES AND PRACTICES:
A COMPARISON.
THE INTEGRATION
OF GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
EDUCATION
IN THE SCHOOL
CURRICULUM
24
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
MaRkuS
PIRChNER
hEad
of SEctor
“non-StatE
actorS”,
EuroPEaid,
EuroPEan
coMMiSSion
LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND
NON-STATE ACTORS FOR
DEVELOPMENT: THE EUROPEAN
STRATEGY TO SUPPORT GLOBAL
CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION
I firstly would like to present our thematic programme “Non-state actors and local authorities in
development” aimed at encouraging non-state actors and local authorities to get more involved
in development issues; secondly, I would like to introduce an important study we are implementing which is aimed at defining a European strategy for development education, called “Study on
the Experience and Actions of the Main European Actors Active in the field of Development Education and Awareness Raising” (the so called DEAR Study), that will also involve development
education stakeholders in a consultation process.
Regarding the thematic program “Non-state actors and local authorities in development” it is
important to say that what the European Commission does in the field of development/ global
education is a part of a bigger programme, called “Development Cooperation Instrument” (DCI),
which is a financing instrument aimed at improving development cooperation. It specifically
implements measures to support the European Commission development policy objectives such
as poverty reduction, sustainable economic and social development and the smooth and gradual integration of developing countries into the world economy. The main objectives of all the
actions that we undertake in development education are: a) raise public awareness of development issues; b) promote education for development in the Community and in acceding countries; c) anchor development policy in European societies; d) mobilize greater public support in
the Community and acceding countries for action against poverty and for fairer relations
between developed and developing countries; e) raise awareness within the European Union of
the issues and difficulties facing developing countries, and last but not least; f ) promote the
social dimension of globalization.
This programme has a budget of around 30 million euro per year. It is not implemented by the
European Commission but by partner organizations, NGOs, such as Save the Children which
make proposals and we eventually select among the various proposals.
The priorities we have set for the programme are first and foremost:
a) public support for the Millennium Development Goals agenda, with particular emphasis on
Sub-Saharan Africa;
b) consistency of development policy, with a particular focus on areas of public interest where
common development goals are important such as: migration, trade (including fair trade),
security, human rights, social dimension of globalization and decent work, environment, and
HIV/AIDS;
c) media and development. I take the liberty to include something that does not come from me.
It is a picture that I have taken from a children drawing competition. I believe it says everything. What do we see in this picture? We see two children, one is a white girl and the other
is a black boy and together they are holding a flag which says “our Earth”. It speaks about common responsibility. They are standing on different parts of the world but they are holding the
same flag. This refers to the idea of solidarity, friendship, cooperation. I think there are a lot
of positive ideas in this picture. For instance, that one can understand what happens on the
other side of the earth, there is the idea of solidarity, the willingness to help, the willingness
to engage. In the back it says “Boys and Girls, from all over the Earth are friends. Their
friendship will save the Earth”. And to a certain degree, this is the outcome that Development
Education can achieve: fostering the understanding of our citizens and exploring what is happening in the South. It says that we want to engage, to share, because it is our Earth and it is
25
on II
i
s
s
e
s
not one continent against another. And, last but not least, there is the sun, that means the
future. There are positive ideas in this picture and I really like it.
Let’s move on. How is the programme implemented? It’s implemented through a system of calls
for proposals. Basically, the European Commission makes funds available and it allocates them
through calls for proposals. It is a system whereby the European Commission collects all the proposals that come in, puts them all together, assesses all the proposals received, and then selects
the best proposals, according to specific criteria. It is a system whereby funding is allocated in a
transparent way. In case any of you is interested, I will include the full web reference:
http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/finance/dci/non_state_actors_en.htm of the last call for
proposals. The next one will be launched in 2011. For the future, I think it is worthy that you look
at what has been done in the past and if you want you can prepare for this call.
Regarding the DEAR Study which EuropeAid has commissioned (“Study on the Experience and
Actions of the Main European Actors Active in the field of Development Education and Awareness Raising”), a “Work in Progress” report has been published on-line (https://webgate.ec.
europa.eu/fpfis/mwikis/aidco/index.php/DEAR:_Development_education_and_awareness_rai
sing) to provide an interim overview of findings, analyses and suggestions that contribute to
meeting the overall purpose of the DEAR Study:
a) An analysis of NSA-LA projects supported by the EC in the period 2005-2009.
b) An overview of the main actors, strategies and initiatives in the field of DEAR in the 27 EU
Member States.
c) The identification of issues relevant to the development of the EC’s support for development
education and awareness raising in order for the EC to give improved added value to initiatives in DEAR carried out by EU member states.
The interim report is part of the process of the Study and explicitly invites comments, corrections
and suggestions from stakeholders and other interested parties. Your responses to the report are
welcome until 18th October 2010.
The Study process involves four phases (we are now in phase 3):
- Phase 1: analysis of projects supported by the EC (February to April 2010).
- Phase 2: fieldwork involving interviews with DEAR stakeholders from governments and NSA
and LAs in the 27 EU Member States (April to June 2010).
- Phase 3: consultation phase inviting comments and suggestions for the Study through a website and a conference that will be held in Brussels at the beginning of October (July to 18th
October 2010).
- Phase 4: conclusion of the Study and formulation of suggestions for consideration by the EC
(October - November 2010).
26
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
aNa tERESa
SaNtOS
na Teresa Santos is responsible for coordinating the DE (Development Education) Worka
ing Group of the Portuguese Platform of NGDOs ((Non Governmental Development
Organizations), where she has been working since 2009. Besides that, she represents the Platform in the Multistakeholder Working Group that elaborated the National DE Strategy and which
is now responsible for the implementation of the Strategy. She has a four-year degree in International Relations from the Technical University of Lisbon and is now taking a Master in Development, Local Diversities and Worldwide Challenges in the Lisbon University Institute.
THE PORTUGUESE NATIONAL
STRATEGY FOR DEVELOPMENT
EDUCATION: A PARTICIPATORY
APPROACH
Firstly, I wanted to thank Save the Children for the kind invitation and I sincerely hope that it will
give a useful contribution to your debate on the promotion of global citizenship education, and
hopefully to the building of a future National Strategy. The adoption of a National Strategy was a
big challenge for Portugal. Among NGDO’s, there was a long tradition to develop DE activities in
formal and non-formal education. Therefore, in 2003, the Portuguese government created a
financing line for DE projects. Moreover, along the years the Portuguese Government signed several international declarations and consensus that expressed the commitment of the government
in the promotion of development education, and in 2005, in the “Strategic Vision for Portuguese
Cooperation”, development education was clearly considered as a priority of the government
expressed. All this factors created a clear need to create a solid framework, in a climate of an interinstitutional dialogue, for all the efforts that have for long been developed in Portugal in this area.
In May 2008, the process for the development of the National Strategy for Development Education was formally launched in Lisbon, by the Portuguese Secretary of State of Foreign Affairs and
Cooperation, in the context of a seminar attended by many civil society organizations along with
representatives of several State institutions. This seminar aimed at presenting three different
experiences of Development Education National Strategies’ (Ireland, Finland and Austria’s) and
at debating problems and needs felt in this same domain in Portugal.
Since the beginning of the process a decisive choice was the decision not to give up on a participative process, even with all the difficulties. And why was this? Wasn’t it easier for the Portuguese
Institute for Development Assistance to write the strategy unilaterally and then just present it to
NGDOs and to the Ministry of Education to implement it?
The option to have a participatory process was a way of assuring that the Strategy would live
beyond the document, and would be broadly appropriated by all the actors related to DE. Only
by having an inclusive strategy and not an exclusive one, would there be effective results that will
certainly have an impact on a long term.
However, right in the beginning, some constraints were identified and some challenges appeared:
• Local and legislative elections would take place in September/October 2009 and this could
result in a change of the government that could lead to a decrease of support toward DE.
However, due to commitments already assumed by all the actors involved, there was an
impossibility of starting continuous work on the process before the end of 2008. How to manage the tension arising from having both a short deadline and a real commitment to participatory engagement of all actors?
• The definition of development education in itself entails the involvement of a variety of actors,
from civil society as well as from public institutions, in the development of a strategic document in this domain. How to identify pertinent actors? How to define the role of each of them
and the way all of them can interact? How to promote co-operative practices at the same time
you acknowledge the diversity of visions and institutional goals, legal statutes, experiences
and social and political sensibilities, and the work relationships between people that have no
27
on II
i
s
s
e
s
personal or institutional mutual knowledge? How to bind each of the institutional actors to
the common project?
• To create a common instrument supposes that you have the capacity of recognizing a common language that allows for dialogue to take place. At a time where global changes are questioning so many of the established concepts, increasing the number of possible meanings, creating doubts and even disagreement on the interpretation of these concepts, how can we
adjust both past and present, as well as different conceptions, to the benefit of the various
actors, and between them and all citizens?
So, how to make this participative process work? In this area the strategy was based on the following elements:
• Three different participation levels were defined:
- a small “strategic group”, leaded by IPAD and also including the Education Ministry, the Portuguese Platform of Development NGOs and CIDAC (a Portuguese NGDO very active in
Development Education and a member of GENE); whose task was to mobilise relevant
actors in DE, planning and do the follow up of the meetings with WG2, outlining the documents structure, discussing and establishing the Strategy’s goals and measures (responsible
for all the dynamics of the process)
- a second larger group of 15 elements, of a consultative nature but also being recognized as
having an effective influence and participation capacity, composed by representatives of
public institutions and civil society organizations (partially platforms) relevant for their thematic focus (development, education, peace, environment, multiculturalism, gender) or
because of the public they work with (youth, teachers);
- and finally, groups of organizations that were to be consulted at the final stage of the process
(Development NGOs, Polytechnic Institutes, Environmental NGOs and others);
- it was decided that the National Strategy for Development Education would be defined
through two documents dealing separately with framework (National Strategy Document)
and implementation (Action Plan), to be elaborated in two different stages (before and after
legislative elections);
• A rigorous calendar was produced which allowed sufficient room for flexibility in order to
incorporate dynamics generated by the process itself.
• The task of writing of the Strategy document was given to an external team (from Coimbra
University) who followed through the different initiatives, produced summaries of both meetings that took place (conceptual debate and Systematization of Experiences) and produced
several versions of the document as they incorporated the results from the various contributions and from the debates within the “strategic group”.
With this context it was possible to take advantage of opportunities such as:
- The presentation of the 1st version of the document to a Cooperation Forum (Created by
the Secretary of State to discuss with different CSO and other actors, issues regarding
Development Cooperation).
- The discussion of this same version on the DE Portuguese Platform group; and the request
for a formal policy statement by the National Education Council (a very important consultant institution regarding all matters on Education).
- The Public presentation of the Strategy in the 3rd edition of our nation Development days,
in 22 of April 2010.
THE PROCESS OF BUILDING THE NATIONAL STRATEGY:
MAIN GOALS AND PHASES
The objectives of the strategy are as follows:
• Strengthening inter-institutional cooperation mechanisms amongst DE actors, and coordinating DE with the other “Educations for...”, as regards contents, methodologies and the promotion of related values.
28
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
• Developing mechanisms that allow for real citizen ownership of DE.
• Integrating global South perspectives into DE processes, thus contributing to counter the
withdrawal of its strong and intervening political mark, and combining the need for conceptual amplitude and openness with the fidelity to the ultimate goals of DE.
• Clearly and permanently adjusting DE methodologies and contents, disregarding any practices that are contrary to the fundamental aims and values of DE.
• Integrating different implementation and impact evaluation instruments, so as to overcome
the existing evaluation deficit in DE initiatives in Portugal.
In order to attain these objectives, the process consisted of four phases:
1. Preparatory Phase
During two years (2006-2008), GENE (Global Education Network Europe) sponsored a specific pilot-project which was the Austria-Portugal Exchange in the domain of DE/GE. This
allowed the two countries to exchange experiences and learn from each other, collecting best
practices that were essential to the success of the Strategy’s success.
The relevant parties in the field of DE were identified, following which Bilateral Meetings were
organized, in order to present the organizations with the national strategy’s methodology and
preparation process, as well as to identify the main constraints in the process.
2. Strategy Definition Phase
This phase was structured around five axes:
• Working meetings of WG 1.
• The joint work of WG1 and WG2.
• GENE’s input (not only by the support to the exchange pilot-project, but also by the creation of document summarizing all similar initiatives at an International level).
• Conceptual Definition Workshop - ( WG1 + WG2) a full day work and was prepared and
facilitated by an external facilitator, who used the jigsaw method to promote the collective work.
• Experience Systematization Exercise - a 2 days meeting under the Systematization of Experiences methodology, that gathered 15 Development NGOs with DE experience, with the
aim of collecting best practices and create basis of understanding (fields of action, target
groups, methodologies and approaches).
3. Public Consultation
• Presentation and analysis at the Cooperation Forum;
• Working Sessions with relevant actors:
- NGDO’s (DE Working Group of the Platform + one afternoon public conference to
present the document).
- Commission for Citizenship and Gender Equality.
- Non - Governmental Environment Organizations.
- Graduate Schools of Education.
- National Education Council.
4. Strategy Adoption and Preparation of the Action Plan
The framework document of the Development Education Strategy was signed by the Secretary of State of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation and by the Ministry of Education, following its
official publication in the Government’s Journal.
From January 2010, until March 2010, the WG1 worked in the Action Plan Document that was
then discussed in the WG2, and that contains typologies of activities, that intend to create a
framework to the specific activities to be organized and included by all the organizations
involved in the process.
Furthermore, in order to formally bind the various institutions involved in the construction,
implementation of the Strategy a Collaboration Protocol was signed.
The development of the Strategy cannot be seen as an end point but as the definition of a framework which will help us face a number of challenges and also open doors for new ones.
29
on II
i
s
s
e
s
Both the format ant the methods used in this process, as well as the communication procedures
adopted (direct, institutional but not bureaucratic) had a significant impact on the general feeling of effective involvement which, it is hoped, will be an element that facilitates future ownership by all entities involved.
The full document of the Strategy can be consulted on: http://www.ipad.mne.gov.pt/ index.php?
option=com_content&task=view&id=569&Itemid=334
Thank you
aLICIa
CabEzuDO
he is professor at the School of Education of the University of Rosario (Argentina) and at the
S
UNESCO Chair on Culture of Peace and Human Rights of the University of Buenos Aires. Her
work is rooted in the contemporary History of Latin America, researching and teaching in the
field of Education for Democracy, Culture of Peace and Human Rights. Her current research
focuses on public policies related to educational programs for building citizen participation and
democracy - particularly on a local level. She also works in training educators on her expertise
field. She is an Annual Visiting Professor at the Master in Peace Education at the University of
Peace (Costa Rica) and at the Master in Development, Conflict and Peace at the University Jaume I
of Castellon (Spain). She teaches Culture of Peace Summer Courses to Arab attendants at the
Institute of Peace Studies in the Bibliotheca Alexandrina.
GLOCAL EDUCATION.
PRINCIPLES ON GLOBAL
EDUCATION AND CITIZENSHIP.
LEARNING FROM THE LATIN
AMERICAN EXPERIENCE
1. INTRODUCTION
21
Cabezudo, A. “Preliminary
document for the Mercociudades
Summit April 2003”, Project for
Democratization, Respect for
Human Rights and Peace in Latin
America, Barcelona Educative
Project, Barcelona, 2003.
22
See Haavelsrud, M. “Principles of
Peace Education”, Education in
Developments, Ed. Arena, Tromso,
1996.
30
Global education - whose main topics are today education for democracy, citizenship promoting
Culture of Peace and respect for human rights as opposed to a culture of violence is particularly
relevant in our days at comparing the values it implies with the structural and direct violence
present in everyday life.
These themes must not be considered as subsidiary topics in educational policies. But, in reality
they have been regarded as necessary but accidental; important but not essential; present but
“absent”. Many times they have been political speech “showing off ” attractive messages with neither innovative changes nor alternative policies for planning an active civic education for the population as a whole 21.
These themes of global gducation mean also education for ethical values, that actually must be
part of public policies as well as educators training with a critical, deep and serious analysis of the
world we share and the historical period we live in.
Everybody knows by now that Democracy does not imply only direct exercise of periodical voting for re-changing representative authorities, but the daily practice of participation in every area
of citizens’ life. This practice must start from early childhood as a learning pattern to develop
freedom of thought, critical autonomy and engagement in individual and collective actions in the
close environment (micro effect). To be transferred lately to more distant, abstract and complex
environments in a cooperative praxis of thought and action (macro effect) 22.
On the other hand, we also know that Peace is not only defined as absence of war and conflict.
It is also a dynamic concept that must be apprehended in positive terms linked to the pursuit of
social and economic justice in which everyone plays an active part. It represents an everyday attitude of nonviolent rebellion, of peaceful dissent, a firm determination to defend human rights
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
and human dignity. Also peace implies the possibility for human beings to fully develop their
potential: “Sustainable human development cannot occur without peace. Nor anybody can sustain social peace without a fair, equitable and permanent planning”, states Peace Nobel Laureate
Adolfo Pérez Esquivel.23
Finally, the concept of Human Rights gets today a broader dimension, since it includes not only
basic traditional human needs but also the right to enjoy those spiritual, psychological and political needs that allow men and women to live their lives with dignity and freedom. In an enriching exchange produced by social life and the political practices resulting from it.
Then, it becomes clear that through history, and particularly in the last twenty years, the concepts of democracy, peace and human rights as well as citizenship are very much linked - more
than ever - and their analysis and study derives to notions of political participation, equity, justice, respect for the rights of peoples, multiculturalism and pluralism as unavoidable conditions
in the modern Rule of Law and the planning of public policies.
Education can contribute to the capacity of the social system to develop successful processes in
this direction and the building of this capacity is a primary task of governments.
This is what Latin American democracies have tried to do after the recovery of democracies in
the 80’s.
Knowledge about participatory democracy as a basic support of the Rule of Law and the teaching and practice of human rights and Culture of Peace open a field for analysis, reflect and action
in the current history of Latin American.
In fact, many programs today aim to generate critical reflection in educational institutions and
governments favoring the execution of projects and planned public policies that produce real
and possible changes towards the values we are preaching.
2. GENERAL AIMS AND CONDITIONS
23
Perez Esquivel, A. Opening Speech
at the UNESCO Chair of Culture of
Peace and Human Rights, University
of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, 2005.
Many countries in the last twenty years have produced educational policies and action strategies
ensuring fundamental freedoms, peace, human rights, democracy and promoting sustainable
and equitable economic and social development. All of which have an essential part to play in
building a comprehensive global education program Many basic guidelines were translated into
strategies, policies and plans of action at institutional and municipal levels - according to the conditions of different communities.
This call for a transformation of the traditional styles of educational action are inspired in existing programs based not only at national level but in many cities and universities. There a systematic approach could be found in order to develop public educational policies based in learning
patterns from democratic building process.
So it is important to take into account existing action plans in order to enhance their practical relevance and effectiveness.
Based on the lessons learned from historical experience, governmental practices, academic
research and literature, Latin American programs in global education proposed the following
conditions for developing education policies towards democracy, citizenship, Culture of Peace
and human rights:
• The construction of collective educational visions at various levels, which involve as many
actors as possible.
• The development of dynamic relations among social actors. The identification of the actors,
their roles and their potential contributions, requires a definition of how the public and private, national and sub-national, elements of power interact.
• The development of consensus, legitimacy and leadership.
• The building of institutional capacity to ensure that the public policy required by the process
is effective. This capacity includes instruments of administrative efficiency, transparency in
public administration, innovative practices and financial sustainability.
• The arise of civic participation in the various steps of the process. It will be necessary to define
and discuss the challenges of strengthening such participation, the diverse ways in which
those challenges can be faced, and their limitations.
• The obtaining of measurable results which reflect improvements in basic living conditions in
the society in which the educational intervention takes place.
31
on II
i
s
s
e
s
3. GLOBAL EDUCATION PROGRAM PRINCIPLES
The Latin American framework for global education development is built around the core concepts and values which inform the purposes and goals of education for democracy, peace,citizenship and human rights at formal, non formal and informal level - including main goals of
social movements struggling for transformation and change in the present world.
According to this statement, projects belonging to this Programme should be:
1) comprehensive and holistic; 2) value based; 3) presented as inquiry into problems;
4) carefully designed and evaluated; 5) practiced within a learner centered pedagogy;
6) designed to develop peace related capacities and peacemaking skills; 7) intentionally
directed toward transformative learning; 8) problem oriented; 9) participatory in the
process and in the goals.
• Using the concept of holism, this proposed policy framework affirms the integration and
interdependence of all components of a given system. It acknowledges both the direct and
indirect relationships between forms of violence at all levels, as well as the integration and
interdependence of the values and practices needed to overcome them. It calls for a systematic integration of content and process, employing participatory and problem oriented pedagogies.
• The program indeed calls for educating for the formation of values consistent with peace,
participatory democracy, human rights and the norms that uphold them.
• Posing content in the form of problems related to a context in which values and principles of
social and political life are violated, promotes a broader and more participatory learning about
possible solutions and ways to achieve them.
• The Program is learner - centered. It is based in a pedagogy that demonstrates a reciprocity
of learning that is built upon the assumption that both educators and students are learners.
Learner centered pedagogy fosters an awareness of this reciprocity of learning, how it facilitates the building of collective knowledge and acknowledges the experiences of all learners
involved in the process. Methods of learner centered pedagogy include - amongst others - critical inquiry and cooperative learning.
• Global education explores also multi disciplinary and developmental approaches to address
violence in all its varied forms: direct, structural and cultural. At any given time and place
peace and human rights education are dependent upon contextual conditions, as well as on
the specific life experience of the learner/ educators/ teachers within those conditions.
• Diverse ways of communication are appropriate to make them participatory, and to make
them suited to the level of maturity and cultural circumstances of a given group.
• Lastly, the Program attempts to cultivate learning that inspire peoples to actively pursue the
transformation of the present society through considerations of alternatives. Hence it strives
to demonstrate the futility of violence through the cultivation of peace - democratic and
human rights related values as well as knowledge, attitudes and behaviours.24
Finally, applying these basic principles the following Pedagogic Aims were proposed for a comprehensive program in global education.
4. PEDAGOGIC AIMS
- Integration of formal, non formal and informal education.
Policy-making in education is oftentimes directed only to the formal educational system. In this
Programme it is argued that formal education needs to be synchronized with informal and
non-formal education because socialization and learning happen in all three educations.
- Equal educational opportunity.
The principle of equal educational opportunity is basic to social mobility. Social mobility
implies a fair chance for all regardless of gender, social class, ethnicity and community to
choose an occupation and the educational track leading to that occupation.
24
Cabezudo, A., Ob. cit.
32
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
- Education as a process of individual, collective and social transformation.
This programe intentionally calls for transformative learning, moving from peacelesness to
peacefulness through dismantling cultures of violence and creating cultures of peace and
respect for human rights.
- Education generating critical and participatory thinking.
This programme fosters the capacity of learners to participate in a collective decision-making
process for transformation having an active role along the learning that leads to independence
of criteria and thinking.
- Education as a lifelong-training in democracy and participation.
Civic responsibility can be fostered when learners have a role in improving society, working for
social justice, and working to solve collective problems. Through these processes, learners can
develop an understanding of the values underlying the concept of democracy, and recognize
how participation and the ability to respond to authentic needs improve the quality of life in
the community.
- Education as a practice of freedom.
The field of education cannot be reduced to an ivory tower activity - closed in schools and academic environments - but find its identity involving reflection and action by learners and educators alike. For both has to be a practice of freedom.
5. OBSTACLES TO OVERCOME BY A GLOBAL
EDUCATION PROGRAM
It is to be noted that the success of the Program on Global Education depends on the understanding that planning at all levels must be appropriate - particularly when confronting problems
such as:
• The absence of political will of governments.
• The danger of marginalization of the process within certain government or certain political
change that occurs during the process.
• The absence of target group involvement in the development of processes, policies or support in the different phases of the program.
• The potential use of unsuitable methodologies
• The lack of training of many participants in this kind of programs.
• The insufficiency of coordination and cooperation between the local, national, regional and
international levels.
• The occasional tendency to confine the themes related to democracy / peace / human rights
and citizenship to legal or specific professions instead to widen in a multidisciplinary
approach.
• The resistance to change provoked by new relationships based in participatory strategies of
working in educational programs.
• The lack of adequate - enough budget to the programs.
• The lack of appropriate information regarding the program within the different departments
of government, other organizations and the society as a whole.
CONCLUSION 25
25
See Global Education Guidelines.
A Handbook for Educators to
understand and implement Global
Education, North South Centre of
the Council of Europe Publications,
Lisbon, 2010.
Global education is seen by its proponents and practitioners not only as a valuable source of
social learning and socialization but also as a reservoir of institutional change and improvement
of school in order that what happens within be less academic and better adjusted and integrated to real - life changes.
Global education is emerging as a challenge and a chance to the institutional development of
education, which means the need for a more open and flexible curricula, as well as for the development of a democratic climate in formal and non formal education and a dynamic learning environment.
33
on II
i
s
s
e
s
Policy makers will have to reconsider the role of global education rather than being seen as an
instrument of perpetuating nationalistic goals should open to a world perspective. This perspective will enable peoples to live together in a changeable world- facing permanent transformations where the values of solidarity and cooperation should be strengthened towards a better world for all.
PEtER
MaYO
eter Mayo is Professor and Head of Dept. of Education Studies, Faculty of Education,
P
University of Malta where he teaches/researches in Sociology of Education, Adult Education, International and Comparative Education and Sociology in general. He is the author of
“Gramsci, Freire and Adult Education”, first published in English (Zed, 1999) and subsequently published in six other languages including Italian (Carlo Delfino, 2008), “Learning and
Social Difference” (co-authored with C. Borg, Rowman & Littlefield, 2006) and “Liberating
Praxis: Paulo Freire’s Legacy for Radical Education and Politics” (Praeger, 2004; Sense, 2008)
which won a 2005 AESA Critics Choice Award. He co-edits the book series Postcolonial Studies in Education for Palgrave-Macmillan and edits the series Issues in Adult Education for
Sense Publishers.
TRAINING TEACHERS ON GLOBAL
ISSUES: THE MALTESE EXPERIENCE
INTRODUCTION
In this presentation, I shall be focusing on work I have been carrying out in the Department of
Education Studies, over the years, which stresses the dialectic of the local and the global as far as
the tackling of issues concerning schooling are concerned. We do not teach a course in our
teacher education programme on global issues but it is fair to say that most of our courses tackle local issues in the context of wider global concerns. Global issues cut across our various courses in the Philosophy, Sociology and Psychology of education as transversal themes. The local cannot be discussed in a manner that is divorced from the global as the two are in constant interaction. How can one separate issues concerning racism in Malta from the issue of migration which
then opens up a series of issues related to colonialism and its legacies, neocolonialism, globalization, the arms race, regional agricultural policies, climate change etc.? In this presentation, I will
be focusing on a specific course I have been teaching in the Sociology of Education component
in the foundations of education. The course unit constitutes half a module called ‘Education,
Power and Society’. The component I teach is ‘Learning, Identity and Difference’ (a 14 contact
hr unit) and the term ‘difference’ has no adjective attached to it, as in ‘social difference,’ not to
confine the discussion to an anthropocentric model of difference. We deal with social relations
in relation to power but we also go beyond the domain of intra-human relations to discuss
human-earth relations in the same vein. In a situation such as this the interplay between the local
and the global is emphasized.
SPECIFIC COURSE UNIT
The unit in question deals with issues of identity and engages standpoint theory. Concepts,
such as the Gramscian notion of Hegemony, defined as ”a social condition in which all aspects
of social reality are dominated by or supportive of a dominant group” (adapted from Livingstone, 1984, p. 235), and the Foucauldian notion of ‘Regime of Truth’ are used. Foucault defines
the latter as follows: “Each society has its regime of truth, its ‘general politics’ of truth: that is,
the types of discourse which it accepts and makes function as true; the mechanism and
instances which enable one to distinguish true and false statements; the means by which each
is sanctioned; the techniques and procedures accorded value in the acquisition of truth; the status of those who are charged with saying what counts as true” 26. Key questions raised are:
• Who benefits from current educational provision and who is being excluded?
34
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
• What effects do the dominant discourses, in our educational system, have on the shaping of
pupils’ identities?
• Which particular social standpoints are to be taken on board if one is to help provide a genuinely democratic and inclusive education?
Student teachers are encouraged to view themselves and their prospective pupils, in this context, as relational beings, and to do so not solely in terms of social relations, important though
they are, but also in terms of their relations to the rest of the cosmos. This makes the need to
relate the Maltese situation to the global context all the more important. The major focus is on
issues pertaining to class, ‘race’/ethnicity, gender, disability, sexuality and the environment. However we also draw on important wider contexts that have a bearing on the construction of our
subjectivities:
• direct colonialism/ post-colonialism,
• globalisation and the field of popular culture
Key questions posed with regard to these specific issues include the following:
• What effects does the legacy of the country’s long history of colonialism have on our identity
construction?
• How does this relate to issues concerning social class and ethnicity?
• What effects does the broad and diversified field of mass popular culture have on the shaping
of pupils’ identities?
• How can we, as teachers, develop a critical understanding of different forms of popular culture, to understand our students’ life-worlds and help provide a meaningful and empowering
education?
The issue of popular culture, like colonialism, where parallels are drawn between the Maltese situation and writings by African writers on more global colonial patterns, such as the writings of
Franz Fanon, Paulo Freire, Ngugi Wa Thiong’o and Julius Nyerere, is also viewed in its mass global dimension. The focus is on the transnational culture industry and its impact on subjectivities.
Similar parallels can be drawn with regard to all the other issues tackled throughout the course.
What follows is the entire list of issues tackled: Globalization/Neoliberalism; Social class;
Parental Involvement; Gender; Sexuality; “Race” and Ethnicity; Migration; Postcolonialism;
Disability; Mass Popular Culture; Bio-diversity; Educational Policy Documents and Difference.
Some of the topics easily lend themselves to discussions of global issues. Indeed, a number of
them are ‘global’ in themselves. Take for instance the topic of globalisation and Neoliberalism.
This topic is discussed at the outset because it provides the theoretical underpinning to the
issues tackled throughout the course. The education policy documents section also focuses on
local and international documents namely the National Minimum Curriculum document for
Malta and the EU’s Lifelong Learning Memorandum document. However the topic which stands
out in terms of a discussion on global issues is, as indicated at the outset, that of Migration, which
is tackled soon after the theme of Race and Ethnicity. It is closely connected to the latter issue. I
will now provide an outline of some of the main points discussed with student teachers in the
section on Migration.
MIGRATION AND MULTIETHNIC SOCIETIES
The Larger Scenario
• All regions of the world are under the sway of globalisation.
• This process has always been a feature of the capitalist mode of production characterized by
periodical economic reorganisation and an ongoing quest for the exploration of new markets.
• Intensification of globalisation (Capitalism has since its inception been globalising. What we
have is its intensification).
• Lifelong Learning a feature of globalisation: ‘flexible workers’.
26
Foucault, M. Power/Knowledge:
Selected Interviews and Other
Writings 1972-1977, Gordon
Harvester, London, 1980.
Migration
• The ‘spectre’ of the violent colonial process Europe initiated has come back with a vengeance
to ‘haunt’ it.
35
on II
i
s
s
e
s
• This process is facilitated by the economic requirements of highly industrialized countries
regarding certain types of labour
• These requirements cannot be satisfied by the internal labour market 27.
• This gives rise to the presence of ‘guest workers’ who are often victims of terrible exploitative
situations in terms of payment, conditions of work and the precariousness of their existence
within the borrowed context.
Exploitation
• Fear of the oppressor: one of the challenges faced in this context the opportunity to work,
irrespective of how exploitative the conditions are, becomes the primary concern.
• It is this concern that takes precedence over the concern for political mobilization to confront
the exploitation induced by this process of mobility of labour power across national boundaries.
Dialectic of Past and Present
• The receiving countries in Southern Europe are the same countries that once witnessed mass
waves of emigration.
• These countries have experienced the shift from being exporters to importers of labour power.
Tensions
• Within this cultural hybridisation, one faces the tensions that have characterized the region for
centuries.
• Xenophobia, or more accurately, islamophobia, has become widespread.
• More so in small states (like Malta) - densely populated and small land mass.
• Cultures that, for centuries, were constructed as antagonistic are now expected to co-exist
within the same geographical space.
Critical Response
• Politics of Representation: one should learn about others and obtain the understanding and
knowledge necessary to be able to engage in a critical reading of widely diffused texts (media
images, news packages, representations in film and documentary)
• It is necessary to confront the politics of misrepresentation resulting from historically
entrenched prejudices and deep-seated antagonistic dispositions - reflecting a sense of “positional superiority” 28.
• An anti-racist perspective adopted.
• Anti-racist education across the board- primary, secondary, tertiary education.
• Anti-racist education programmes targeting people working or in contact with immigrants:
army, police, entertainment, teachers, journalists, judiciary etc.
27
Apitzsch, U. “Razzismo ed
Atteggiamenti Verso gli Immigrati
Stranieri. Il Caso della Repubblica
Federale Tedesca”, Quaderni dei
Nuovi Annali, No. 33, pp. 67-76,
1995
28
Said, E. Orientalism, Random
House, New York, 1978.
29
Borg, C., Mayo, P. Learning and
Social Difference. Challenges for
Public Education and Critical
Pedagogy, Boulder, Paradigm, 2006.
30
Giroux, H. Border Crossings,
Routledge, New York and London,
2002.
36
Challenges for teachers29
• Immigrants not ‘deficits’.
• Avoid ‘assistenzialismo’.
• Critical educators should be wary of misrepresenting non-western discourse.
• Critical educators require a good understanding of political economy and knowledge of how
the economic system segregates along ethnic and national lines.
• Critical educators must become ‘border crossers’30 so that they can begin to understand something about the cultures of others, religion included.
• Critical educators need to recognise the contributions of others to the development of their
own culture; they should recognise what non-European cultures contributed to ‘western civilisation.’
• Schools should not remain isolated from the surrounding community but should be an integral part of this community as conceived of in all its multiethnic, multicultural and bio-diverse
features.
• Critical educators must recognise that being a migrant constitutes only one aspect of a person’s multiple identities / subjectivities.
• Critical educators should realise that although the work factor weighs heavily on migrants’
minds, the notion of citizenship ascribed to them should be more than that of producer/consumer.
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
CONCLUSION
I trust that the foregoing points, adapted from a powerpoint presentation used in class, provides some indication of how the global interacts with the local in so far as a specific topic in
the entire unit on ‘Learning, Identity and Difference’, a core unit, is concerned. While transversal global themes are necessary in our teacher education programme, a greater concentration on global issues and development education would not be amiss in a specific area of specialization - prospective teachers specializing in Personal and Social Development (PSD), a
compulsory subject in secondary schools in Malta. This subject replaced the old ‘civics’ and
is intended to broaden the discussions beyond ‘life skills’ to incorporate discussions of social
structures as well as aspects of individual behavior. The intention in introducing this type of
subject in the late 80s is that issues do not become solely personalized and ‘over-psychologised.’ Teachers and students tackle the social and structural dimensions involved. Hence
prospective teachers specializing in this subject are exposed to areas emerging from the disciplines of psychology, philosophy and sociology. This is one area of teacher secondary education specialization where development education and global issues can be developed as
specific units. Needless to say, global issues also cut across the various units in this specialisation as transversal themes. One of the units I teach, namely ‘Education and the World of
Work,’ necessitates such an approach as we, once again, discuss globalization, neoliberalism
and the international economic scenario as it impinges on the Maltese situation, besides
international attempts at an alternative approach to work e.g. cooperatives. A unit focusing
specifically on global issues or development education would, however, be a valuable addition to the programme geared for prospective PSD teachers.
JuStYNa
JaNISzEwSka
ustyna Janiszewska - graduated in political science. In the Non-Governmental Organizations
JDevelopment
sector as volunteer and paid staff since 1998. Board Member of the Polish Non-Governmental
Organization (NGDO) Platform - Zagranica Group, where she was an Executive
Secretary between 2003 and 2006. Currently holding the position of President of the Board of
the Education for Democracy Foundation, where she has been working since 2006. Specialized
in development/ global education and also active member of the Zagranica Working Group on
this issue.
BUILDING A MULTI-STAKEHOLDER
AGREEMENT ON GLOBAL
EDUCATION IN POLAND
In Poland in recent years some changes have given rise to opportunities for the improvement of
global education and for its integration in the formal education system.
Firstly, following the last parliamentary elections in autumn 2007 the attitude of the Ministry of
Education (MoE) has become more positive and the dialogue between the Ministry and Non
Governmental-Organizations (NGOs) on global education has become possible. The Minister
had been for many years in the NGO sector, while the Undersecretary of State responsible for
relations with the civil society arrived at the Ministry straight from an NGO, moreover, from one
of the leading NGOs in the field of global and development education. It was an unprecedented
change in comparison to the past - global education at schools could take place without the support and blessing of the Ministry of Education (MoE), but no systemic change could be done
without the active involvement of the Ministry.
Secondly, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) invited experts from GENE (Global Education
Network Europe) a European network of Ministries, Agencies and other national bodies responsible for support, funding and policy-making in the field of global education to examine the state
of development / global education in Poland. A report from that peer review issued in winter
2010, though gentle and politically correct, reflects, to a large extent, views of the civic sector and
37
on II
i
s
s
e
s
is an important instrument for further advocacy. It highlights major deficits and recommends a
number of ways to improve the situation.
Finally, a Working Group on Development Education in the Zagranica Group (the Polish Non
Governmental-Development Organization Platform - that is member of CONCORD 31, the member) has mobilized a number of people from various sectors in order to work together on the
Polish consensus on global education. A kick-off event for the process of elaborating a consensus happened to be a conference held in December 2009 and for a number of reasons it is worth
a few sentences. The conference was organized with the support and in partnership with the
North-South Centre of the Council of Europe, as well as with the support and honorary patronage of the MoE. It gathered more than fifty people, whose daily work is connected to global education at different levels - representatives of MoE, MFA, Ministry of Environment, teachers intraining centers, school supervising structures, NGOs, universities and individual teachers.
Though the conference had a rather general content, it brought about many initial common,
inter-sector reflections and helped to establish links and basic trust among different groups of
participants.
Findings and conclusions at the conferences became a canvas for a so-called process of building
a Polish consensus on global education. The leading role in this process is played by NGOs namely the activists from a few organizations gathered in the Working Group on Development
Education, while other sectors and actors were invited to take part in the process and share
responsibility for its results. Six meetings have been scheduled - four of them have already taken
place and their results are being further discussed and mastered. Two final meetings will take
place in October and November 2010. Topics of the meetings are as follows:
1. Definition and scope of global education, development education and education for sustainable development;
2. Quality criteria for global education;
3. Global education in the formal education system;
4. New actors in global education - who is missing, who is needed?
5. Financing of global education;
6. Rounding up meeting.
In every inter-sector meeting up to 20 people representing different institutions and sectors take
part. Results of their work are published on an Internet platform, where anyone interested (but
registered to the website and present under his/her name, not anonymously) can take part in the
on-line discussion, add comments, and express criticism.
31
CONCORD is the European NGO
Confederation for Relief and
Development.
38
I believe that the process itself can be treated as a case study or even as a good practice.
Although, after 8 months since we started, the exhaustion of many actors taking part can be
observed, I also see undeniable positive sides of this initiative. First of all, a direct possibility to
confront ways of thinking, opinions, and needs of different sectors during open discussion is
extremely important and is a value in itself. Secondly, the process contributes to building step by
step a broader group of people from various environments, who want to share responsibility for
global education in Poland.
The formal education sector (particularly primary and secondary schools) has its place in all of
the above mentioned events and processes. The most important effect of the change of attitude
of the MoE towards global education is its much stronger presence in the school curricula. In
2008 a revision of the school curriculum (from grade 1 to 12) was undertaken. NGOs dealing
with Global/ Development Education were aware that this was a big chance, which would not be
repeated soon, as the school curriculum is reformed at multiannual intervals. The chance was
used properly - postulates of our experts delegated to the commissions working on the revision,
were accepted at a satisfactory level. Global education content is much more present in the new
curriculum, than it used to be before. What is probably worth mentioning is that the work was
mostly done by NGOs (Working Group on Development Education again) with some consultations with teachers already involved in global education and experts from the Central Teachers
In-Training Centre.
The presence of global education content in the school curriculum brings us a new level of development of global education in Poland and provides us with a new framework. Global education
should from now on be present in formal education; a systemic change was possible and became
a fact. However, the truth is, that the curriculum is only the first step. The educational goals that
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
are not understood by teachers will remain empty words and will not be taken to the classrooms.
Teachers need to be supported in acquiring adequate knowledge and didactical materials. School
books need to carry that content - and not just any content, but the one of good quality. So
there’s further work to be done with publishers, authors, schoolbook assessors, methodological
advisors and numerous thousands of Polish teachers. Nevertheless, the first and most important
step has been done, we are inside the door and the door won’t close anymore. The work on the
school curriculum can be treated as an important good practice.
Implementation of systemic changes opens doors to improvements on a global scale, but with
or without legal changes, smaller scale initiatives are necessary and if done well can significantly
contribute to the development of global education, even if on a local scale. Here, I would like to
mention just two undertakings supporting the enforcement of global education in schools,
which in my opinion can be called good practices.
The Centre for Citizenship Education is a Warsaw based NGO dedicated to improvements in formal and non-formal education. For a few years now they have been promoting films as a tool for
global education. Teachers involved in the project receive complex support - they are trained
simultaneously on global education content as such and on using movies as an educational tool
and after they receive packages of materials. Films are carefully chosen to represent particular
phenomena. They should not be too long and translation into Polish should be provided. In a
book accompanying a set of films, there are additional materials - on that particular situation presented in the movie and on the broader context. There are also scenarios of lessons with variations for different ages of pupils. Essential for the project is investment in people - materials are
not distributed to anyone interested (with high probability that they would end up never opened
and used), but to those who received proper training. It might sound obvious; however, I still
observe many initiatives in which very short and basic training is supposed to equip teachers or
educators in knowledge and skills to run global education by themselves. The question on quality of global / development education remains open.
From my perspective, also as an educator providing stationary and on-line training on global education, it is very important, that good written material already exists - guides referring to “Code
of conduct on images and messages”. The Code is an important tool and a sort of “Decalogue”,
but without additional explanation it might be too abstract for many people. Two years ago the
Institute of Global Responsibility issued a book entitled “How to talk about majority of the
World?” which is in fact a practical guide to the Code with examples and references to the Polish
ground. It is a good tool for teachers and can help them to find the best ways of communicating
on global issues not only during dedicated lessons, but also to build their responsibility for the
words and language they use, which influences their pupils.
39
on II
i
s
s
e
s
LauRa
JOhNSON
aura Johnson is a doctoral researcher at the Institute of Education, University of London,
L
specialising in Global Citizenship Education. Formerly a Senior Policy Advisor in the UK
Civil Service, she trained as a Citizenship teacher and has taught Citizenship and Law in several London secondary schools. Her most recent article, co-authored with Professor Paul
Morris, is entitled “Towards a framework for critical citizenship education” (Curriculum Journal, 2010, 21:1, 77-96).
UK GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
EDUCATION: POLICY AND PRACTICE
ABSTRACT
While the four education systems of the United Kingdom differ in many ways, there are a
number of commonalities in their provision of global citizenship and development education.
This is, in part, due to various common cultural, political and economic factors; but it is also
due to the UK-wide remit of the Department for International Development and its funding
streams for ‘development awareness’, from which have sprung a wide range of exemplary
educational programmes. This paper outlines current UK policy frameworks for global citizenship education; examines some of the enablers and barriers to provision; and identifies a
variety of projects aiming to open students’ eyes to key themes such as global justice and the
Millennium Development Goals.
INTRODUCTION
32
QCA The National Curriculum
2007: Citizenship Programme of
study for key stage 3 and attainment
target, 2007, p. 27. Retrieved from:
http://curriculum.qca.org.uk/
uploads/QCA-07-3329pCitizenship3_tcm8-396.pdf
33
QCA Citizenship: The National
Curriculum for England,
Programme of Study and
Attainment Targets, Key Stages 3 and
4, 1999. Retrieved from:
http://curriculum.qcda.gov.uk/
uploads/Citizenship%201999%20
programme%20of%20study_tcm812053.pdf
34
Marshall, H. “Developing The
Global Gaze In Citizenship
Education: Exploring The
Perspectives Of Global Education
NGO Workers In England”,
International Journal of Citizenship
and Teacher Education, 1(2), 2005,
pp. 76-92.
35
Raffe, D., Brannen, K., Croxford, L.,
& Martin, C. “Comparing England,
Scotland, Wales and Northern
Ireland: The case for home
internationals in comparative
research”, Comparative Education,
35(1), 199, pp. 9-25.
40
The use of the term ‘global citizenship education’ has increased significantly in recent years
in the United Kingdom (UK). The English Citizenship programme of study for Key Stage 3
(11-14 year olds) in 2007, for example, aims for students to “play an active role in the life of
their schools, neighbourhoods, communities and wider society as active and global citizens” 32, which the previous Citizenship programme of study 33 had not included. What exactly is meant by ‘global citizens’ in such passages is often ambiguous 34, but this can in practice
help to provide space for creativity and innovation within UK curricular contexts. In this
paper I will outline UK policy frameworks for global citizenship education; examine enablers
and barriers to its provision; and identify a variety of forms of implementation of policy into
practice, including partnerships between government sponsors, Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and education providers.
BACKGROUND: THE UK EDUCATION POLICY BASE
The United Kingdom contains four distinct national education systems, which can cause complications for comparative education researchers but also allows them to make interesting
comparisons between them. Raffe, Brannen, Croxford and Martin 35 argue that the differences
between the education systems of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland reflect the
processes of nation-state formation within each country: for example, Wales and England
were politically incorporated during the development of their systems for national education
(from the sixteenth to the nineteenth century), and have very similar educational practices;
whereas Scotland was separate from England and Wales during the growth of its education
system in the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and retains significant differences to this day. Northern Irish education, on the other hand, started as part of the Irish system but has moved closer to the English and Welsh systems since its separation from the
Republic of Ireland in 1921.
Policy responsibilities are increasingly being devolved from the UK Government to the Welsh
Assembly, Scottish Parliament and Northern Ireland Assembly, but some elements are still
UK-based: for example, the Department for International Development, which has some
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
responsibility for education provision in the area of development awareness. English, Scottish
and Welsh education used to be administered primarily by Local Education Authorities
(LEAs); in Northern Ireland these were termed ‘Education and Library Boards’ 36. However, in
recent years the powers of the English LEAs in particular have been surrendered to central
government management and school-based management, particularly through choice-based
agendas such as the creation of specialist schools, academies and, more recently, free schools.
ENABLERS AND BARRIERS TO UK GLOBAL
CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION PROVISION
A number of factors help to promote forms of global citizenship education within the UK context. First, and most crucially, government support and funding from the Departments for
Education in each country and from the UK-wide Department for International Development
(DfID) allows programmes to develop with appropriate support. In England, the introduction
of citizenship education as a compulsory curriculum subject in 2002 has enabled global citizenship education to find a new opening in schools: particularly given the combined focus on
human rights and responsibilities, active citizenship and critical thinking. ‘The global dimension’ has also been added as a cross-curricular subject, based around eight ‘key concepts’ constructed by DfID and English Department for Education policy makers (see Appendix 1) but
such cross-curricular themes tend to lack the status given to ‘examination’ subjects such as
English, Citizenship and History. Nevertheless, the very mention of citizenship, human rights,
the global dimension and global citizenship within curriculum policy provides a useful justification for those constructing and implementing educational programmes related to such
themes. This is further supported by the centrally controlled nature of the curriculum within
England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland 37, which promotes centralisation of research
and programme design and facilitates partnerships between local and national bodies. Conversely, the flexibility of the national curricula in each country, and the ambiguities of global
citizenship as a curricular concept, also play a part in enabling effective global citizenship education, since they provide spaces for creativity and encourage teacher-student involvement in
constructing learning programmes, comparable to the opportunities identified by Johnson
and Morris 38 for the promotion of ‘critical citizenship’ within the curriculum.
36
Raffe, D. et al., op. cit.
Hughes, A. S., Print, M., Sears, A.
“Curriculum capacity and citizenship
education: a comparative analysis of
four democracies”, Compare: A
journal of comparative and
international education, 40(3),
2010, pp. 293-309.
38
Johnson, L., Morris, P. Critical
Citizenship Education in England
and France: a Comparative
Analysis of Curriculum Features,
Origins and Transformative
Potential. Paper presented at the
BAICE 2010 Conference: Education
and Social Justice in Challenging
Times, 2010a; Johnson, L., Morris, P.
“Towards a framework for critical
citizenship education”, Curriculum
Journal, 21(1), 2010b, pp. 77-96.
39
Hughes, A. S. Et al., op. cit.
40
Including the Scottish umbrella
organisation IDEAS (International
Development Education Association
of Scotland), its Welsh equivalent,
Cyfanfyd, and the ‘Centre for Global
Education’ in Northern Ireland.
37
Hughes, Print and Sears 39 compare citizenship education practice in Australia, England, Canada and the USA, and conclude that England is the most successful of these countries “in moving from rhetoric to reality in terms of adequate support for citizenship education”. Through
their analysis, they identify seven principal ways in which government support can contribute
to the ‘success’ of a curricular programme such as citizenship education. These are as follows:
1. National debates on substantive issues;
2. Clearly articulated goals;
3. Curriculum resources for schools;
4. Teacher professional development;
5. Implementation strategy;
6. Research and development policy in support;
7. Adequate funding.
Within the UK, clear policy structures have been constructed that fulfil a number of these criteria in relation to global citizenship education. These are summarised in Appendix 2. The
European Union, Departments for Education and DfID are the governmental structures providing the main source of funding and curriculum development for global citizenship programmes. For example, DfID’s core support for the Development Education Research Centre
(DERC) aids the “research and development” element. Its ‘Enabling Effective Support’ (EES)
strategy, alongside funding for regional Development Education Centres (DECs) 40 and the
national (UK-focused) Development Education Association (DEA), provides the capacity to
build curriculum resources and to run teacher professional development programmes, as
well as generating strategies for implementation and contributing to national debates. Finally
DfID’s ‘Development Awareness Fund’, by allocating grants of between £10,000 and £300,000
for the purpose of promoting awareness of the importance of international aid and the Mil41
on II
i
s
s
e
s
41
Oxfam A curriculum for global
citizenship. Oxford: Oxfam
Development Education Programme,
1997; Oxfam Education for Global
Citizenship: A Guide for Schools.
Oxford: Oxfam Development
Education Programme, 2006.
42
Which, as Bryan and Vavrus note, is
unwise since education itself can
often manifest and propagate the
very societal problems it is
purportedly able to resolve (“The
promise and peril of education: the
teaching of in/tolerance in an era of
globalisation. Globalisation”,
Societies and Education, 3(2), 2005,
pp. 183-202).
43
For example, the ‘No More Knives’
programme launched in 2008 in
response to a perceived spate of
incidents involving young people
with knives, including the murder of
Ben Kinsella, the sixteen-year-old
brother of a television celebrity
(Mains, A. “Knife crime: Education is
key to solution”, The Mirror, 3rd July
2008. Retrieved from:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/2008/07/03/knife-crimeeducation-is-key-to-solution-11587520629388/; Percival, J. “Brown’s
knife-crime plans dismissed as
gimmick”, The Guardian, 5th June
2008. Retrieved from:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
politics/2008/jun/05/justice.
knifecrime).
44
McGlynn, C., Niens, U., Cairns, E.,
& Hewstone, M. “Moving out of
conflict: the contribution of
integrated schools in Northern
Ireland to identity, attitudes,
forgiveness and reconciliation”,
Journal of Peace Education, 1(2),
2004, pp. 147-163.
45
As well as other education projects,
including the aforementioned ‘No
More Knives’ programme which in
May 2010 was threatened with
closure due to funding cuts (Abrams,
F. “Funding cuts threaten schools’
knife-crime programmes”, The
Guardian, (4th May 2010). Retrieved
from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/
education/2010/may/04/schoolsfunding-knife-crime
46
Indeed, the devolutionary ‘school
choice’ agenda designed to put
control in parents’ / local hands is
likely to marginalise the importance
of the citizenship curriculum and
global citizenship education; or at
least result in substantially increased
diversity in provision across schools.
47
Raffe, D. et al., op. cit.
48
Laxton, for example, observed this
phenomenon in relation to
Citizenship education in England, in
which the lack of a full GCSE
examination in Citizenship Studies
when the subject was introduced as a
distinct part of the compulsory
curriculum (in 2002) diminished the
subject’s status in students’ eyes in
comparison with other subjects. See:
Laxton, K. Does the GCSE short
course in citizenship studies affect
42
lennium Development Goals, helps charities, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and
other bodies to be innovative and pioneering in their implementation of global citizenship
education programmes.
The strong relationships between charities, NGOs and policy-makers are an important
enabler for global citizenship education in the UK. Organisations such as Save the Children,
Oxfam, ActionAid and Amnesty International have developed strong curricular resources promoting human rights and global responsibilities, using the public’s support for their charity
and campaign-based activities as a springboard for programmes of active global citizenship.
Oxfam’s 41 ‘Curriculum for global citizenship’ (Appendix 3) has been particularly influential on
both the curriculum development of the ‘global dimension’ in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland (and ‘education for sustainable development and global citizenship’ in Wales),
and on a number of specific UK education projects, which construct learning aims and activities based predominantly upon this framework.
Barriers to the effective provision of global citizenship education in the UK also exist. Five elements in particular inhibit the progress of the ‘success factors’ and damage the relationships
between policy-makers and providers, as follows:
1. Rapidly and radically changing policies;
2. Financial uncertainty;
3. Unequal schooling systems;
4. Testing and examination frameworks;
5. Lack of public awareness and/or public mistrust of global citizenship education programmes.
First, the lack of a formal UK written constitution and the opposition-based parliamentary system (particularly in England) can cause education policy to change rapidly and radically, especially as education is often viewed as a panacea that can solve society’s problems 42, resulting
in reactionary policy-making that can sideline elements of the global in favour of local and
national themes 43. In areas of conflict such as Northern Ireland, sectarian violence and community segregation can also have a damaging impact on the effectiveness and sustainability
of global citizenship education policies, although the growth of integrated schools and the
increasing devolution of education policy-making to the Northern Ireland Executive helps to
mitigate this damage 44. Second, financial uncertainty, particularly through governmental ‘efficiency drives’, can threaten funding streams and stunt the longevity of global citizenship education projects 45. Third, the inequalities prevalent in the UK schooling systems (most notably
in England and Northern Ireland) cause unequal provision of global citizenship education.
These inequalities are exacerbated by choice / market-based agendas (which currently manifest in the growth of academies and free schools) 46; continuing structures of academic selection (in areas where the grammar school system still exists); and the existence of strong independent and religious sectors in schooling 47: for example, English independent schools, academies and free schools are not required to follow the national curriculum, and thus many do
not teach citizenship as a curriculum subject. Fourth, the competitive testing and examination frameworks within all four countries of the UK tend to detract from those curricular elements that are not part of the traditional exam series, including the global dimension and
global citizenship education, which can result in the cessation (or dramatic reduction) of
teaching within these areas as soon as the exam courses begin, generally at fourteen years of
age 48. Finally, public unawareness and mistrust can be damaging to global citizenship education: in 2009, for example, a report was published by a right-wing think tank criticising DfID’s
spending on certain development awareness projects (including training programmes for
pre-school teachers on global citizenship, diversity and culture), which caused such a furore
in the right-wing press that the five projects specifically mentioned in this report were cut
immediately on the arrival in 2010 of the new Conservative Minister for International Development, despite already being underway and having been allocated up to £300,000 per project by the previous government 49.
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
the status of citizenship at key stage
4? An empirical study, Unpublished
MA Dissertation, Institute of
Education, University of London,
2007.
49
Ford, L. “Andrew Mitchell axes
development awareness projects”,
The Guardian, (17th May 2010).
Retrieved from:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
katine/katine-chroniclesblog/2010/may/17/mitchelldevelopment-awareness-cuts.
Mendick, R. “£50m of Government’s
international aid budget spent in the
UK”, The Telegraph, (13th February
2010). Retrieved from:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/
news/newstopics/politics/
7228534/50m-of-Governmentsinternational-aid-budget-spentin-the-UK.html. Prince, R. “Andrew
Mitchell announces immediate cuts
for frivolous aid projects”, The
Telegraph, (17th May 2010).
Retrieved from:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/
news/newstopics/politics/
7730447/Andrew-Mitchellannounces-immediate-cuts-forfrivolous-aid-projects.html. Shipman,
T. “£250,000 of Third World aid...for
Hackney: Taxpayers funding Brazilian
dance troupe in London borough”,
The Daily Mail, (12th September
2009). Retrieved from:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/
article-1212935/250-000-Third-Worldaid-Hackney-Taxpayers-fundingBrazilian-dance-troupe-Londonborough.html.
50
A wide-ranging list of examples of
good practice can be accessed on the
Development Education Association
website (DEA, 2010).
51
TIDE~, TIDE~ Global Learning,
2010. Retrieved from:
http://www.tidec.org/
52
DEEEP, Developing Europeans’
Engagement for the Eradication of
Global Poverty, 2010. Retrieved from
http://www.deeep.org/.
53
Oxfam, Active Global Citizenship
Conferences 2010, 2010. Retrieved
from: http://www.oxfam.
org.uk/education/resources/
regional_conferences/
54
Y Care International, Youth Justice
in Action, 2010. Retrieved from:
http://www.youthjusticeinaction.org/
youthjustice; this campaign has also
received funding from the European
Commission’s ‘Youth in Action
Programme’.
55
Centre for the Study of Social and
Global Justice, Open Spaces for
Dialogue and Enquiry Methodology,
2007. Retrieved from:
http://www.osdemethodology.
org.uk/
56
DERC, Global Dimension to Initial
Teacher Training, 2010. Retrieved
from: http://www.ioe.ac.uk/
research/33595.html; Manchester
Metropolitan University, & Training
and Development Agency, The
Global Dimension in Initial Teacher
POLICY INTO PRACTICE: FORMS OF IMPLEMENTATION
While the barriers to global citizenship education can be significant, examples of good practice abound within schools, universities and further education colleges; youth clubs; pupil
referral units, prisons and other educational contexts 50. These can loosely be categorised into
four fields, based on their supporting organisations:
1. Local, National and Regional Governmental Support: for example, the work of Development Education Centres such as TIDE~ (Teachers in Development Education) Global
Learning, in Birmingham, England 51, which runs teacher professional development courses and designs curricular resources for global citizenship education; and the work of the
European Union’s ‘Developing Europeans’ Engagement for the Eradication of Global
Poverty’ 52 programme.
2. Charity, NGO and Private Company Support: for example, the 2010 Oxfam Active Global
Citizenship Conferences for 11-18 year olds, aiming to “give secondary school students and
sixth formers the skills and motivation to take action on global poverty” 53; and the work of
Y Care International (the YMCA’s international relief and development agency) providing
inmates of a young offender’s institution with the opportunity to participate in a global
Youth Justice in Action campaign 54.
3. University / Academic Support: for example, the ‘OSDE Methodology’ (Open Spaces for
Dialogue and Enquiry) constructed from the post-colonial perspective and promoted by
academics at the ‘Centre for the Study of Social and Global Justice’, School of Politics and
International Relations, Nottingham University, England 55; and DERC (Development Education Research Centre) and Manchester Metropolitan University projects to engage PGCE
(teacher training) students with global issues 56.
4. Combinations / Partnerships of the three above categories: for example, a North London
Model United Nations programme funded by a European Union Comenius Regio grant and
run by schoolteachers in partnership with the local Council and the UK Citizenship Foundation; the Commonwealth Youth Summits, organised by the Royal Commonwealth Society (an NGO) and funded through a DfID Development Awareness Fund grant 57; the ‘Global Gateway’, an international school linking programme supported by the Departments of
Education of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland and managed by the British
Council, a semi-autonomous NGO funded partly by government and partly by providing
services such as English language learning 58; and Amnesty International’s collaboration
with IDEAS (International Development Education Association of Scotland) to produce
human rights and global citizenship education teaching resources and teacher development courses in line with Scotland’s ‘Curriculum for Excellence’ 59. These are often manifested as local and NGO-run programmes supported and encouraged by intergovernmental organisations and central government; and couched within national curriculum contexts.
RECENT CHANGES... LOOKING TO THE FUTURE?
2010 has seen significant shifts in the UK educational policy base, due to the change in government from Labour to Conservative and the ramifications of the financial crisis which are
being used to justify substantial cuts across government departments. Within global citizenship education, cuts have already been made to certain existing programmes 60; the DfID
Development Awareness Fund and Mini-Grants schemes have been closed; and the future
funding of Development Education Centres is uncertain due to the replacement of DfID’s
‘Enabling Effective Support’ funding stream with a new centrally-organised ‘Global Learning
Programme’ 61.
The rhetoric of the ‘Big Society’, signifying the more active involvement of individuals, community groups and NGOs in combating social problems alongside a reduction in government
programmes, may have a positive effect on the global citizenship education agenda, encouraging more creative projects and partnerships between NGOs and education providers, for
example. However, given the strong need for government support as identified by Hughes,
43
on II
i
s
s
e
s
Print and Sears 62 in their seven enablers, and as illustrated by the practical examples, it is also
possible that the UK’s provision of high quality global citizenship education programmes will
decline in years to come. It remains to be seen whether global citizenship education in the
UK is built on strong foundations or on a ‘bed of sand’. Nevertheless, the high levels of NGO
involvement; the existing policy frameworks, including organisations such as DERC (the
Development Education Research Centre) and the DEA (Development Education Association); and the support from the European Union and other intergovernmental organisations
such as UNESCO make it plausible that many of the exciting programmes such as those outlined here will continue into the future and allow new generations to access exciting and challenging programmes of global citizenship education.
APPENDIX 1. DFID / DFES GUIDANCE ON “THE 8 KEY CONCEPTS
UNDERLYING THE IDEA OF THE GLOBAL DIMENSION TO THE CURRICULUM
(DfES, 2005, pp. 12-13)
Global
citizenship
Conflict
resolution
Diversity
Social
justice
Human rights
Values and
perceptions
Interdependence
Education, 2010. Retrieved from:
http://www.tda.gov.uk/upload/resou
rces/pdf/q/qts_standards_casestudy
_mmu_global.pdf
57
Royal Commonwealth Society,
Commonwealth Youth Summits,
2010. Retrieved from:
http://www.thercs.org/youth/
summits.
58
British, Council The Global
Gateway: Bringing an International
Dimension to Education, 2010.
Retrieved from
http://www.globalgateway.org.uk/
59
Amnesty International UK,
Teaching Resources for Scotland;
Human Rights and Global
Citizenship across the Curriculum
for Excellence, 2010. Retrieved from:
http://www.amnesty.org.uk/content.
asp?CategoryID=10420.
60
Ford, L., op. cit.
61
DfID Support for global learning
in schools, 2010. Retrieved from
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/GettingInvolved/For-schools/
62
Hughes, A. et al., op. cit.
44
Sustainable
development
APPENDIX 2. POLICY STRUCTURES IN UK GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION
European Union
DfID (Department
for International Development)
DDfE (Department
for Education) England
DERC
(Development
Education
Research Centre)
Development
Education
Centres
DfE (Wales)
DEA
(Development
Education
Association)
Charities / NGOs
Universities /
Further Education
Curriculum
Development
Agencies
DfE (Scotland)
DfE (Northern Ireland)
Teacher
Training
Agencies
Local Education Authorities
Youth Clubs
Schools
Other
School
Inspectors
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
APPENDIX 3. OXFAM’S (1997, 2006) CURRICULUM FOR GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
The key elements for
responsable Global
Citizenship
Knowledge and
understanding
Skills
Value and attitudes
• Social justice and equity
• Diversity
• Globalisation and
interdependence
• Sustainable development
• Peace and Conflict
• Critical thinking
• Ability to argue effectively
• Ability to challenge injustice
and inequalities
• Respect for people
and things
• Co-operation and conflict
resolution
• Sense of identity
and self-esteem
• Empathy
• Commitment to social
justice and equity
• Value and respect
for diversity
• Concern for
the environment
and commitment to
sustainable development
• Belief that people can make
a difference
45
I
I
I
n
o
i
s
s
Se
A COMPARISON
OF NATIONAL
PRACTICES
46
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
PIEtRO
PINtO
n economist, active in the NGO sector for 15 years, particularly in the field of development
a
education. He is the spokeperson for the National Development Education Platform of the
Italian NGO Association (AOI). He is a researcher on migration and a member of the Scientific
Committee of the Dossier Statistico Caritas/Migrantes and one of the promoters of the Osservatori Associati sulle Immigrazioni (OASI - Associate Observatories on migrations).
PIERa
GIODa
he is responsible for the “School” Working Group of the National Platform for Development
S
Education. She is an expert in training processes and directs the Global Citizenship Education section of the CISV Non Governmental Organization. She has coordinated the “Verso un sistema nazionale di Eas” project (Towards a national system of Development Education), which
carried out a research action in 5 Italian regions and she started the participatory process to
reach a shared Charter of principles in Italy.
“TOWARDS A NATIONAL SYSTEM
OF DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION
IN ITALY
63
63
The article was written by two
people and aims at documenting the
important events of the work of the
Platform for Development Education
in the autumn of 2010.
64
Since 2000, within the Italian ONG
Association, several thematic
platforms were formed, which have a
network nature and are discussion,
interaction and coordination points
between organizations that work on
specific macro-themes.
65
Comunità Volontari per il Mondo
(CVM), http://www.cvm.an.it/
66
http://www.educazione
allosviluppo.net/sistemaeas.htm.
The Platform for Development Education was founded in 1999 by a group of Development Education practitioners (EAS) belonging to different federations of Italian Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), who decide to work together to share experiences, practices, information and
last but not least, create common programmes of self-training. This work group became one of
the Platforms of the Association of Italian NGOs that was growing at the time 64.
The Platform for Development Education (EAS) structured its course of work throughout the
years starting from the needs of the practitioners. The most important activity is the annual
organization of self-training seminars. The first seminars were held in Collevecchio, in Lazio and
during the seminars, among other events, there is the so-called “Easmarket”, a meeting between
practitioners who want to create partnership networks across the federations they belong to.
Throughout the years, during the Seminars at Bagno di Romagna and Rimini, the Platform was
structured further and sub-workgroups were created (e.g. the Group on the Millennium Development Goals, the Europa Group, the Territory Group and the School Group) and together with
the Association of Italian NGOs, advocacy actions were organized to promote Development Education within government institutions.
So, throughout the years, a practice and research community was formed, which has helped
NGO personnel learn and work through networks in the territory, even though on the basis of
variable alliances (due to the difficulty of Italian NGOs to develop an organic and shared political
background).
The most recent phases of the work process of the Platform for Development Education have
been:
• Several national or European cooperative projects, which have improved networking skills
and campaigning and advocacy skills.
• The work done by the School Group, made up of more than 30 NGO representatives, which
holds annual national and European meetings. At the annual study seminars held in the
Marche Region, the group focused on the intercultural review of school curricula. In this case,
the CVM NGO 65, which collaborated with the School Group organizations, played a decisive
role.
• The commitment by some Local Authorities (the Piemonte Regional Council and the Marche
Regional Council) to create local Development Education networks within European projects
promoted by them in partnership with organizations present in the territory, capable also of
creating synergies with the Platform for Development Education.
• The research-action activity carried out within the cooperative project promoted by CISV,
ACRA, COSPE, LTM, UCODEP in five Italian regions (Piedmont, Lombardy, Emilia Romagna,
Tuscany, Campania) entitled “Towards a National System of Development Education”, cofunded by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs 66.
47
on III
i
s
s
e
s
On the basis of the Research-Action activity carried out in the 5 mentioned regions, in 2009 a
process that led to the writing of “Charter of the Principles of Global Citizenship Education”
started, involving an increasing number of organizations on a national scale.
The phases of this process were:
- the “Towards a National System of Development Education” seminar, held in Turin, on 17
March 2010 with 90 practitioners from different regions (particularly Piedmont, Lombardy,
Campania, Emilia Romagna, Tucany, Marche, Lazio);
- The Platform for Development Education assembly on 27 September 2010 in Turin with the
participation of about 50 practitioners;
- the continuation of the assembly in an online conference on 25october 2010, where 20 practitioners participated;
- the assembly on 10 November 2010 in Senigallia to define the last operative aspects, with 25
participating practitioners.
In this last assembly it was decided by a majority vote to change the name of the Platform in Platform for Global Citizenship Education and the “Reference Document” containing the “Charter
of Principles”, which we present below, was definitely approved.
GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION
The reference document of the Platform for Global Citizenship Education
Introduction
Development Education (DE) is a term that gained ground in the 80s in Italy and in Europe to
widely define and refer to activities generating learning processes (education, training, awareness
raising) strongly connected with Development Cooperation 68.
Initially conceived within the context of formal Education, in collaboration among schools and
cooperation NGOs, Development Education extended its scope of work to lifelong learning, thus
taking into account the recommendations of the European Parliament, which has defined the
key social and civic competences for lifelong learning 69.
The Italian formal educational system has taken into account some elements of this pedagogical
debate and included recommendations, in some guideline documents 70, so that educational
themes and processes inspired by global citizenship are included in school curricula.
67
This is how Law 49/87, which
regulates the Italian State’s
commitment for Development Public
Help, defines it. The same term is
used by the EU Development
Council in the 2001 Resolution and
the European Consensus of 2007.
68
Recommendations by the
European Parliament and the
European Union Council of 18
December 2006.
69
“Culture, School, Person”, Ministry
of Education (2007); guideline
document “Citizenship and the
Constitution”, Ministry of Education
(2009)
70
DESD aims at preparing people of
all ages and conditions to face and
solve issues that threaten the future
sustainability of our planet... Issues
that emerge from the three
sustainable development spheres:
environment, society, economy.
(http://www.unescodess.it/
implementation_scheme).
48
By proclaiming the Decade for Education for Sustainable Development (DESD) for the period
2005-2004, the General Assembly of the United Nations expressed the importance for a more
equitable future that respects people and the planet’s resources 71 to the governments and civil
societies of all the world.
Going beyond the terminological question
A lot of educators and the practitioners of the Italian International Cooperation think that the
expression “Development Education” includes inadequate elements, thus creating the necessity
of rethinking forms and contents.
In the most recent cultural debate what is called into question is the concept of development, in
the sense of growth within a linear process based on scientific and technological progress: the
so-called “western model of modernization”. The negative impacts of the development of a
minority of the world’s population are so great, that it appears difficult to go on considering them
as “side effects of progress”. “Economic reductionism”, which has rendered the idea of development one-dimensional, seems to be outdated. This idea has been stripped of its no longer
acceptable and evidently no longer sustainable connotations, which completely ignore the fundamental importance of human rights, sustainability and the concept of public goods: it has been
seriously called into question in order to effect a critical deconstruction.
But in this redefinition, something of the term “development” can still be saved: the hope of
improving human life. So, though maintaining the particularity of an “education” that was “for
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
development, the need of deconstructing DE is discussed in order to redefine it from the Global Citizenship Education perspective.
An education, therefore, whose method and aim of action is creating relationships between people, experiences, cultures and themes.
An educational, didactic, experiential and political proposal structured around basic values like
human rights, lawfulness, importance and respect for diversity, communication between cultures, reciprocal interdependence and the need of sustainable development from an economic,
social and environmental point of view.
Today, in Italy, this particular attention to education is becoming crucial for redesigning:
- the course of action that will pull us out of the tragic economic and financial crisis, generated
by the model of development that has characterized our recent past and with which we will
have to deal also in the future.
- the concept of citizenship, with all its multi-faceted meanings.
Convinced that change is possible and that education is a form of intervention in the world, this
document expresses the will to overcome the issues related to the term, in order to work for an
education capable of facing the future, which focuses on human rights, common assets and
sustainability.
Charter of principles of Global Citizenship Education
This Charter addresses citizens of all ages - the Public Administration, ONGs, businesses, workers, schools and education agencies in the territory. The Charter aims at orienting research,
reflection and discussion among actors and influencing public choices towards greater sustainability and equity. It fosters a process for the reform of the educational system to accomplish lifelong learning for citizens.
To define the quality of education we want to create, it is important to assert the vital principles
and criteria that, obviously, should be exercised taking into consideration the contexts, territories and partners involved.
Coherently with these principles, monitoring and evaluation systems have to be found to help
put theory into practice. Such systems have to allow those making an educational proposal
to understand its impact, reinforce knowledge and after elaborate new and “fully-developed”
theories.
Global Citizenship Education
• Renders people actors of their own development and awareness and so it:
- focuses on the learning subject, his characteristics and needs, giving importance to his
autonomy, opinion and freedom of expression and enhancing his skills and views;
- fosters key competences such as critical autonomy, sense of responsibility, ability to make
individual and collective decisions and act in a participatory way, also in uncertain conditions, while being aware of the limits (as regards shared responsibility in managing common
assets and limitedness of resources);
- enhances diversity among people (cultures, language, ways of communication).
• Permits us to understand and see the connections between the big problems that the international community has to tackle for a human and eco-sustainable future and so it:
- highlights the planetary interdependence between people, cultures, states, societies, the
North and the South of the world, between local and global phenomena;
- works for awareness of global effects on local actions and vice versa;
- stimulates curiosity and desire for wider knowledge of the world’s complexity to raise
awareness of being citizens of the world, capable of empirical solidarity towards those
whose rights are violated.
• Puts the territories and people of the world into contact for reciprocal learning and to create cooperation relationships and intercultural exchange and so it:
- interacts with the local and global territory and intends to tackle important themes for the
49
on III
i
s
s
e
s
development of intercultural, sustainable and more equitable relations between different
territories on the planet;
- encourages the various stakeholders (public and private) to interact and create partnerships
and co-projects.
• Renders citizens capable of acting to provoke change both on an individual and collective
level, and so it:
- fosters reflection, action and behaviour to build active citizenship across the whole planet
• Promote the integration of knowledge and methodologies to create new knowledge and
therefore:
- if it is carried out within a formal education context (school), it proposes interdisciplinary,
pluridisciplinary and cross-reference courses of study;
- promotes contexts where different knowledge and skills are enhanced, together with the
awareness of their limitations;
- develops around distinct “problems, constructed by the participants and therefore suitable
for their age and interests, through cooperative and interactive methods;
- enhances diversity and differences (of participants, points of view on the problem) as a
resource to find intercultural and eco-sustainable solutions.
• Intends to influence national and international economic, social and environmental policies, so that they are based on the respect of human of rights and consequently more equitable and eco-sustainable. and therefore it:
- represents social growth: it is based on a thorough analysis of the past, it clearly identifies
innovation and it sets itself in a long term sustainability perspective;
- permits us to clearly and unmistakably express the view and the role of the actors of the civil
society that promote it;
- permits an inclusive process and supports opinions, experiences, proposals of the citizens
of the South of the World;
- involves institutions (national, local, international);
- relates to the media and uses new forms of communication and languages (New Technologies).
Networking, creating a local system
The network we want to reinforce is not the sum of many subjects. It’s a community that learns,
shares and transforms itself.
This is its added value: the target cannot be reached alone, we learn by reciprocal exchange and
the effect is greater both as a result of the critical mass and the effort of sharing and learning
together.
A network in the sense of a community can be created only by developing a job that produces
something that is shared. First of all, the problems we want to tackle have to be shared and we
have to find the words to name them. Then, we share our working objects and goals, ways of
dealing with them, actions to develop, ways of reflecting on what is done and produced (here
lies the very essence of evaluating: not an accomplishment, but the activity of the productive elements of what is being done).
A network that involves different subjects, who are together not because obliged to by some
norm, but because they chose and recognize each other as necessary subjects to deal with the
problems and produce significant results; education and sustainability, therefore, considered as
a result of the interaction and integration of what Global Citizenship educators do with local
authorities, national and international institutions, migrant associations and communities, territorial subjects, organised and non-organized citizens, companies oriented towards social responsibility, media.
This type of networking can only be perceived as a learning process that requires mutual recognition, trust and availability. Qualities that can never be considered as fully acquired, but require
continuous attention to be maintained.
Management of coordination, animation-facilities, education, evaluation and communication
50
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
becomes of great importance for the creation, development and continuation of a network. Such
attention requires adequate emotional, financial and time investments.
Network development on a territorial dimension, where relation networks (local, regional,
national and “global”), knowledge, ability to stick to local resources without dispersing them,
ability of planning for the future are operative, is easier.
Operative and educational agreements can be reached with “local territorial systems” committed
to sustainability research. Such systems provide the context and, to a certain extent, the goal of
global citizenship education.
This does not preclude networks from having relationships and links with territories and people
from other parts of the world. Distance and diversity renders working together more complex,
but also more significant and important. Such processes stimulate ideas and transformation in
the local territory as well as in partner territories on a national and international level, thanks to
communication and exchange of ideas. A form of governance that does not endanger, but rather
encourages participation and democratizes educational processes.
DaNIELa
INvERNIzzI
aniela Invernizzi is an expert in Children Rights Education. She is author of texts on chilD
dren rights and of school texts in the English language. She is a consutant for Unicef Milan
and Cesvi and head of Acra education desk. Among her publications: Cittadini under 18, collana Crescendo Emi 2004 and co-authored with A. Redaelli, Cultures, Ed Lang, Paravia, Bruno
Mondadori, 2004.
GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION
THROUGH PRACTICES
OF PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY
AT SCHOOL
On 20 November 1989, the United Nations General Assembly unanimously approved the International Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).
The document is the result of the work of a group of experts who had been discussing and
elaborating a text since 1979. This text had to take in account the significant differences
(political, social, economic, religious...) between the member States of the United Nations
and mediate to get to the declaration of human rights of minors on the planet. The CRC is an
international humanitarian legislative treaty which the UN has submitted for ratification 71 by
the member States. It came into force on 2 September 1990 after the twentieth ratification.
So far, the Convention has been ratified by 191 states. Only the United States and Somalia still
have not ratified it. It is therefore the human rights treaty that has had the most ratifications
in history. Italy ratified the CRC in 1991 and so Law no. 176 is currently in force. Previous
human rights documents acted prevalently as a common set of principles to be followed. For
the first time, the CRC has a binding effect on ratifying states, which have to report on their
legislative and social programmes regarding children and adolescents on a national and international level. It should be pointed out that we are still far from reaching a perfect and effective monitoring and control system of the actual implementation of the Convention in the single states. The CRC is based on four founding principles which are also part of the 54 articles,
introduced by the Preamble:
71
When a state ratifies a Convention
it undertakes to make it operative
within its territori through
legislation. It is a juridical
commitment.
•
•
•
•
Art. 2. Non discrimination.
Art. 3. Best interests of the child.
Art. 6. Life - survival - development.
Art. 12. Participation - consideration - respect.
51
on III
i
s
s
e
s
Participation as a quality indicator of the projects
The International Convention on the Rights of the Child gives great prominence to children’s and
adolescents’ participation and expresses the idea in a number of articles e.g. 12, 13, 14, 15. So
participation represents the most innovative part of the whole cultural framework of the document.
In the international sphere, participation by minors is increasingly being given more attention
and it is a theme that is analysed and studied.
In September 2006 the Committee on the Rights of the Child dedicated its Forty-third session to
this theme “Day of general discussion on the right of the child to be heard”.
The Preamble of the final document states that:
To speak, to participate, to have their views taken into account. These three phases
describe the sequence of the enjoyment of the right to participate from a functional point
of view. The new and deeper meaning of this right is that it should establish a new social
contract. One by which children are fully recognised as rights-holders who are not only
entitled to receive protection but also have the right to participate in all matters affecting
them, a right which can be considered as the symbol for their recognition as rights holders. This implies, on the long term, changes in political, social, institutional and cultural
structures.
And point 13 of the Recommendations:
While recalling the General Comment N. 5 on the General Measures of Implementation
the Committee reaffirms that “Listening to children should not be seen as an end in itself,
but rather as a means by which States make their interactions with children and their
actions on behalf of children ever more sensitive to the implementation of children’s
rights... but article 12 requires consistent and ongoing arrangements.
Involvement of and consultation with children must also avoid being tokenistic and aim
to ascertain representative views.”
Enhancing children’s social role very often clashes with a still widespread adult oriented culture
which finds it hard to consider under 18s as right-holders. They might have different perceptions, ideas, considerations from the adults and so they should have the opportunity to express
themselves. It is not enough to just interpret their needs, their points of view, but real and constructive discussions should be started, and spaces and time should be planned where and when
they can directly make themselves heard.
Participation could be considered as a significant quality indicator in projects which are directly
or indirectly intended for children. For example teachers who plan teaching activities for their
classes should always ask themselves some questions:
1. Are participatory methods involving students contemplated in this project?
2. Is participation a sporadic method or is it a gradual, intentional process that gives rise to several and varied democracy experiences?
3. Are students encouraged to express their opinions, is expressing their opinion part of the
teaching exercise?
4. Do adults reflects on their ability to listen? Do they critically consider students’ opinions?
Under 18s are not just particularly vulnerable subjects, who should be protected and assisted, but
they are citizens who have the right to participate in the life of the community they belong to
and to express themselves on all the issues that concern them. They should be considered as an
invaluable and creative resource which can introduce an original approach towards problems.
Some considerations for the analysis of participation within the CRC
72
Lansdown, G. Promuovere le
partecipazione dei ragazzi per
costruire la democrazia, UNICEF,
Firenze, 2001.
52
Participation is a fundamental human right. It is not a concession conceded to children by adults
at their own discretion.
Participation is not an end but a tool which gives minors the possibility to act personally in order
to safeguard and promote their rights and to report their violation 72.
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
Participation is a gradual decision process which has to involve children in all those aspects
where choices that affect their life and the community they belong to are made. The term
“process” implies that it is possible to become “participation experts” only through a lot of ongoing experiences.
Participation is connected to information, which is an important component. So equal opportunities in accessing information and respect of ethical criteria in communication should be promoted. Article 17 of the CRC, while recognizing the importance of media, demands a sense of
responsibility and adequate behaviour from the media towards under 18s.
Consequently, to overcome mere ambitious and demagogical perspectives, it is necessary:
• To intentionally programme participatory processes, which provide for and give value and dignity to the presence of children, who have to significantly perceive and experience the
process, and after understand and share its meaning.
• In order to participate in community life, one has to desire to do it, feel like constructing
something with others. So motivation is a very important aspect of the process. One cannot
be obliged to participate and one should be able to change one’s mind freely.
• It is only through continuous participatory methods that supportive citizenship behaviour
and approaches are internalized. Children can experience democratic decision-making
processes in all contexts: family, school, work, community. But school is the privileged place,
because it is the only space that is shared by students for a long and structured time.
• Being aware of citizenship rights (practising participation and developing democratic and dialogic behaviours) also means understanding that we have responsibilities towards others who
are equally rights-holders without discrimination.
• Participation means acquiring a sense of belonging to a project, a context, an idea. It means
“feeling part of ”, being protagonists/active partners and not simple spectators.
• Participation means being able to become competent in the rights one enjoys starting from
the awareness of one’s own situation.
Democracy experience at school
In recent years there has been a more intense activity in experimentation and project work in
order to translate the CRC in educational programming. Such activities could either start from
the general themes proposed by the whole typology of human rights expressed in the CRC or
consider themes and problems pertaining to particular categories of children who, though rightsholders, need particular attention (children belonging to minorities, disabled children, victims of
child abuse, child soldiers) that can guarantee their life quality, through protection and promotion of their rights to the highest degree possible.
A best practice:The Charter of Rights
The Charters of Rights constitute an important trend that has evolved on different scales from
local contexts (Charter of Student Rights in a School) to national (Charter of Child Rights in hospital) and international spheres (Charter of Child Movements and Adolescent Workers - NATs -).
Just to mention some important examples.
Such experiences have common characteristics, even though they were developed in different
contexts and with different methods.
• Promoting a new culture that considers children as human rights holders.
• Transforming the CRC into a dialogic working tool that encourages discussion and reflection,
starting from shared principles.
• Promoting participation and sharing through democratic educational processes.
The Charters of Rights and Responsibilities formulated within a school environment as participatory processes with the involvement of all the components (students, teachers, non academic
staff, headmasters) provide the possibility to pursue important goals.
• Teach respect of legality and democratic participation.
• Develop a sense of belonging to the school community.
53
on III
i
s
s
e
s
•
•
•
•
Promote welfare at school.
Guide pupils to reflect critically on their behaviour and to make personal choices.
Strengthen autonomy and organization and collaboration abilities.
Promote Discussion and Planning among the various Components (parent-student Mixed
Commission).
• Practising democracy at school requires adequate time and space, and particularly, a firm conviction that Active Citizenship Education can be cross-curricular and can be enhanced through
specific in-depth studies of certain subjects.
MauRIzIO
GuSSO
aurizio Gusso is the president of IRIS (interdisciplinary teaching and research of history),
M
member of Direttivi di Clio ’92 and LANDIS (National laboratory of history teaching), of
the education commission of INSMLI (National Institute for the history of the liberation movement in Italy) and of the Lombardy ELLIS Network (citizenship education, literature and music,
languages, history and geography studies), teacher trainer at all school levels on the borderline
between history teaching and intercultural citizenship education.
A RE-READING OF “CITIZENSHIP
AND THE CONSTITUTION”
IN THE LIGHT OF A SOLIDARITY
BETWEEN “EDUCATIONS”
AND SCHOOL SUBJECTS
73
1. AN ‘INTEGRATING BACKGROUND’: MUTUAL SOLIDARITY
BETWEEN ‘EDUCATIONS’ AND ‘SCHOOL SUBJECTS’’
1.1 ‘First and second generation Educations’
Expressions like “new Educations” or ‘second-generation Educations’ refer to a set of educational dimensions that have been more recently codified as opposed to the so-called “first-generation Educations”.
The set of cross-curricular educational goals, considered for a longer time and discreetly settled in regulations and teaching practices as for example Language-Communication/Literary
Education, Aesthetic/Artistic/Music Education, Psychomotor Education, Science Education,
Technology Education, Computer Education, Maths Education, Philosophy Education,
Space/Geography Education, Time/History Education, are formally called “first-generation
Educations”. Each one is linked to a subject (or a group of subjects) that, historically, has
always set the pace or led the way (Languages and Italian and Foreign Literature, Art, Music,
Physical Education, Sciences, Technical Education, Computer Studies, Mathematics, Philosophy, Geography, History respectively).
Likewise, we can conventionally called “new Educations” a set of educational dimensions that
include the following semantic-conceptual fields, that are not listed in order of importance.
73
The goals have been taken from
the project Charter of student rights
by “Sabin” School in Milano 2.
54
A) Democratic Citizenship Education, that includes Civic Education, Civil Society Education,
Human Rights Education, Rights of the Child Education, Legality Education.
B) Intercultural Education, including Education for Global Citizenship and Education against
Racism.
C) Equal Opportunities Education or more specifically pedagogy of difference.
D)Education for peace and for a constructive/non-violent conflict management.
E) Education for the Environmental, Cultural, Artistic and Historical Patrimony and Media Education.
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
F) Sustainable Development Education, a synthesis of Global Development Education and Environment Education.
G)Health and Bioethics Education, including Nutrition Education, Relationship Education, Affection Education and Sex Education.
Such ‘Educations’ are not water-tight compartments, but are closely connected and complimentary: just think, for example of the useful and necessary interconnection among Democratic Citizenship Education and Intercultural Education, Equal Opportunities Education, Sustainable
Development Education and Peace Education.
It should be highlighted that the overlapping/converging areas among the single “new Educations” are the great majority; however it should be pointed out that each ‘Education’ has its own
specific characteristics. Between “Education” and “educations” there is a similar analogy as
between “Knowledge” and “learning” or “subjects”. For example, no “Education” can do without
intercultural communication, citizenship and other dimensions; however the specific nature of
Intercultural Education is dealing with the complex relationships between people/social groups
and subcultures/cultures; the specific nature of Citizenship Education is dealing with the democratic education of citizens. In the same way, it seems appropriate to highlight that Citizenship
Education, in an increasingly multicultural society, cannot not be intercultural, however Intercultural Education is not totally resolved in Citizenship Education and vice versa. Nonetheless, as academic publications have long been speaking of “Multicultural Citizenship” or “Intercultural Citizenship”, the ELLIS Network intentionally started using the expression “Intercultural Citizenship
Education” for an integrated approach towards Citizenship Education and Intercultural Education.
1.2 “New Educations” and subjects: a mutual solidarity
It seems quite right to think of every teacher as a combination of a fairly good ‘global/general
educator’ (an all-round educator, competent in the global aspect of Education and in the transversal topics of ‘new Educations’) and a fairly good “local/specialist educator” (competent in the
specific subjects) who gives importance to the two aspects: transversal/global and specific/local.
It involves promoting forms of “mutual solidarity” between curriculum subjects and ‘Educations’,
with continual exchanges between them.
When starting from a single ‘Education’, its transversal goals and skills should be exemplified and
defined as specific curricular subject goals and/or skills. To do this, the self-referential sediments
of school subjects (e.g. History) have to be peeled off in order to identify the basic essence of
the corresponding research subjects (e.g.: historiography) and use its paradigms, theories, methods, practices, interpretative categories and models, techniques, tools, languages, social uses,
educational values etc. as resources.
When starting from the single curriculum subjects, ‘Educations’, rather than being regarded as
pedagogical-abstract sermons and/or rather than having to be value-added contents, they can be
considered as ‘recurring trends’ of coherent goals, themes and teaching strategies 74, in the light
of which every school subject can be re-read. The single ‘Educations’ could be used as ‘transversal’ organizing/problem creating selectors (external but not extrinsic) of subject contents, together with the more intrinsically school subject selectors/organizers, as for example, increasing
familiarization with specific subject languages.
1.3 Some examples of interconnections between ‘Educations’ and curriculum school
subjects in Lombardy
74
President of IRIS (Interdisciplinary
History Teaching and Research) and
member of the Board of the
Lombardy Network ELLIS
(Education, Literature and Music,
Languages, History and Geography
Studies).
For quite some years, in Lombardy, the Local Education Authorities and the USRL (the Regional
Education Office for Lombardy), various subject associations and NGOs (Non-governmental
Organizations) in collaboration with the ex-IRRSAE/IRRE Lombardy (Regional Educational
Research Institutes/Regional Institutes for Research, Educational Experimentation and Updating)
and the present ANSAS - NTL (National Agency for the Development of School Autonomy - Lombardy) together have been trying to carry out forms of mutual solidarity between curriculum subjects and ‘new Educations’.
55
on III
i
s
s
e
s
The following experiences are some examples:
A) The inter-institutional Project Portare il mondo a scuola (Taking the world to school), promoted by ten Lombardy NGOs ((AICOS, ASPEm, CeLIM, CESPI, CESVI, COE, Fratelli dell’Uomo, GRT, ICEI, and Mani Tese - CRES) IRRSAE Lombardy and the Local Education Authorities
of Milan and Como in 1995-1999 75.
B) The activities organized by the group called Portare il mondo a scuola, founded in 2004 and
made up of eleven Lombardy NGOs ((ACRA, ASPEm, CeLIM, CESPI, COE, Cooperativa Chico
Mendes, CRES - Mani Tese, Fratelli dell’Uomo, ICEI, Intervita and Save the Children Italia); see
website www.portareilmondoascuola.it.
C) The activities organized by Rete ELLIS, founded in 2006 and at the moment made up of seven
subject associations recognized by the Ministry of Education (ADI-SD, AIIG Clio, ’92, GISCEL,
IRIS, LEND and SIEM) and six NGOs (ASPEm, CeLIM, Fratelli dell’Uomo, ICEI, Mani Tese - with
scientific advice from CRES - and Save the Children Italy), and the support of ANSAS - NTL and
USRL; see website www.reteellis.it.
See also the research studies and publications by IRRSAE/IRRE Lombardy on the vertical curriculum of the geo-historical-social study area 76, to a large extent based on ‘Educations’, and the most
recent proposals by IRIS (see the websites www.storieinrete.org and www.didatticaestoria.net).
2. A RE-READING OF “CITIZENSHIP AND THE CONSTITUTION”
IN THE LIGHT OF MUTUAL SOLIDARITY BETWEEN
CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND SCHOOL SUBJECTS
2.1 Mutual solidarity between Citizenship Education and school subjects as a particular case of mutual solidarity between ‘Educations’ and school subjects
Mutual solidarity can be created between every ‘Education’ and every subject, but this is particularly so in the case of any subject and Intercultural Citizenship Education. On one hand, we have
to review the subject curricula in the light of the goals of Intercultural Citizenship Education. On
the other, it is possible to build finer interdisciplinary models, within and outside the “subject
areas”, based on the four fundamental interdisciplinary grounds (purpose/aims; contents, with
appropriate themes and problems; methods of research; ‘learning strategies’: learning methods,
techniques, instruments, interaction/communication forms etc.), by gradually passing from a
pre-disciplinary intuitive-global approach to corrected subject and interdisciplinary/’integrated’
approaches, or rather to the convergence of different points of views, subject contributions and
languages on topics that are - so to speak - interdisciplinary.
75
Gusso, M. Educazioni e area
geostorico - sociale: una solidarietà
reciproca, in Aa. Vv., Scienze
geostorico-sociali per un curricolo
verticale. Dalla Ricerca-Azione alla
Sperimentazione Assistita, IRRSAE
Lombardia, Milano, 1998, pp. 29-38;
Id., Ipotesi per un curricolo
continuo di area, in S. Citterio - M.
Salvarezza (edited by), L’area
geostorico-sociale. Dalla ricerca ai
curricoli, Angeli, Milano, 2004, pp.
154-176 and particularly 170-172.
76
ONG Lombarde - IRRSAE
Lombardia - Provveditorato agli Studi
di Milano (edited by), Portare il
mondo a scuola, CRES - Edizioni
Lavoro, Roma, 1999.
77
Aa. Vv., Per un curricolo continuo
di formazione geostorico-sociale
nella scuola di base, IRRSAE
Lombardia, Milano, 1994, voll. 2; Aa.
Vv., Scienze… cit.; S. Citterio - M.
Salvarezza (a c. di), op. cit.
56
2.2 Teaching research as a guide through the maze of Citizenship Education
Given the limits of school regulations and of the European and Italian migration legislation, a
double “copernican revolution” is necessary:
a) adopt teaching research (best practices by researchers and teachers and proposals by their
associations and NGOs), the international Charters of Human Rights and the democratic participatory processes as a guide for Citizenship Education;
b) adopt school regulations and European and Italian migration legislation to explore not only
local and national citizenship, but also intercultural and planetary citizenship.
2.3 New citizenship and Intercultural Citizenship Education concepts and practices
The historical processes of globalization and ‘glocalization’, the ‘inversion of the migratory
current’, the arrival of the ‘post-industrial’ society, of new technologies and new media, the
crisis of the national State, the terrible experiences of negation of human rights in totalitarian regimes and the processes of democratization have led to the emergence of ‘new historical subjects’ (e.g. feminist, youth, peace, environment, no global movements etc.), of new
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
generations of rights and new conflicts between different right bearers, and to a redefinition
of human rights. In the wake of the international charters of human rights, the primacy of the
juridical and national dimensions of citizenship seems to be overcome and gradually the idea
of a necessary citizenship and Citizenship Education, characterized by the following key
adjectives, is gaining ground:
a) democratic/inclusive;
b) active/participatory;
c) aware/intentional and responsible;
d) global or multidimensional, or related to the various types of rights (and responsibilities), corresponding to the various generations of rights, redefined in different ways: human, civil/political, social/economic, cultural, environmental etc.;
e) ‘multi-scaled’, that is, related to different geopolitical and administrative fields and to the different spatial dimensions: planetary, supranational (e.g.: European), national, regional subnational (e.g.: regional administrations) and local and ‘tree-like’ (a tree that does not have the
national state’s juridical citizenship, but the global, inclusive and planetary dimension of
human rights);
f ) ‘dual’/‘plural’, or rather considerate of ‘gender’ differences and of the plurality of subjects
(men/women, minors/adults, majorities/minorities, lay/religious, natives/immigrants etc.).
Participatory Citizenship Education requires an interactive and workshop method of teaching
and a serious commitment to intercultural dialogue and to democratization of daily life at school
and in other life environments and implies a close connection with Human Rights Education,
Equal Opportunities Education and Education for Constructive Conflict Management.
MaRILENa
SaLvaREzza
arilena Salvarezza is the PMS (Portare il Mondo a Scuola) coordinator. Portare il Mondo a
M
Scuola (Taking the World to School, ntd) is a working group that intends introducing the
knowledge and methodologies of development education, intercultural education, human rights
education into school institutions in Lombardy with a focus on global issues. At present this
group is made up of the development education departments of eleven NGOs in Lombardy. The
group organizes seminars, produces publications and, collectively or through single NGOs, offers
courses for teachers and students. Portare il Mondo a Scuola operates from the local-global point
of view, that is, focuses on the specific nature of the territory and the complex international framework, and acts as an intermediary between the North and the South to exchange experiences
and best practices.
CITIZENSHIP “ACTION-RESEARCH”
Portare il mondo a scuola (Taking the world to school) is a study group and teaching practice group made up of eleven Lombard NGOs which deem the common creation of an educational and formative project for Italian schools in a global perspective, as a good strategy plan.
Portare il mondo a scuola, with its particular characteristic, forms one of the components of
the complex mosaic which in different ways has acted as a cultural agency in these years of dramatic social and institutional void. Those who form part of Portare il mondo a scuola have
reached a conclusion based on a common context analysis, characterized by globalization and
the decline of Western culture. The decline of western culture monopoly can be experienced
positively only if it provokes a fluid process of culture merging and gives rise to new shared
society rules.
In Italy, a symbolic and actual dismantling of state schools is in process, which risks transforming them into “schools for the poor and the disadvantaged”. State schools are no longer places
where disadvantages are compensated for, but places which reproduce exclusion and dropping-out.
We need to work to design the cultural project, but also knowledge, methods, inclusive and quality school practices aimed at multitasking digital natives, bearers of different cultures. Education
of citizens is of a global nature and starts “in the cradle” passing through continuous forms of participation training.
57
on III
i
s
s
e
s
This project has to hold together different interconnected levels:
a) the knowledge level, both interdisciplinary and interconnected knowledge, which have to be
redefined and re-ranked in the light of values (the education of citizens for whom knowledge
is a strong awareness and decision tool and who become creators of the knowledge production process, because they are part of the community);
b) the level of learning methods and methods of active knowledge and its promulgation. Learning should aim at gathering a plurality of views and voices, rather than certain and codified
knowledge.
Portare il mondo a scuola’s research was carried out around a dynamic and complex concept
of citizenship education which calls for teachers’ expertise, institutional models (democracy) and
territorial dimension. Due to its “acted” aspect, every learning process in global citizenship education corresponds to its “communication” and social return, and therefore requires a “democratic” teaching-learning model that can incorporate world points of view and experiences.
Portare il mondo a scuola has identified research actions (realized in some school contexts) as
effective practices to carry out these assumptions. Action-research accomplishes simultaneously
teacher training and their being actors-researchers, involving students in all the phases with
whom themes, procedures and responsibilities are negotiated, transformation of knowledge in
“doing”, social use of what was researched and learnt. The realized programmes and products
can be seen on the website www.portareilmondoascuola.it.
FRaNCESCO
CaPPELLI
e has been a school Headmaster for 20 years and since 2005 he has been Headmaster at
h
the “Casa del Sole” School in Milan. Previously, he was a maths and science teacher in middle school, since 1976. For several years he has been vice-president of CIDI (Teacher Centre of
Democratic Initiatives) in Milan, a professional organization of teachers and headmasters. He has
been a trainer on didactical and pedagogical themes, related particularly to assessment, for many
years. He has collaborated with several authorities among which the Ministry of Education, the
Regional School Authority, the Provincial School Authority, the Cattolica University, the MilanoBicocca University and other education bodies. He has published several contributions on journals and texts of scholastic and professional interest. In 2010 he received the merit certificate of
the IV edition “Premiazione dei Giusti” Award from the “Citizens of the World Movement” for the
high level of his pedagogical work and for his work in upgrading multiculturalism as a characteristic of the present.
INTEGRATION AND MULTICULTURALISM:
EXPERIENCES IN THE TERRITORY
The school where I work is an example of multicultural reality in evolution within a city context,
whose urban characteristics can give an immediate and highly representative interpretation of
the phenomenon. What I mean is that the position of the school, between Viale Monza (Monza
Avenue) e Via Padova (Padova Street), both of which start in Piazzale Loreto (Loreto Square) in
northern Milan, a densely populated area with a long history of internal migration, represents the
natural theatre where recent migration started and has developed strongly.
The origins of the new migrants present on this territory represent the whole planet: many
Philippines, Chinese, South Americans, Arabs, Asians, ex-Eastern European countries, gypsies. I
will not give numerical details, as I believe that here the inevitable institutional principles and
choices should be taken into consideration when dealing with this phenomenon.
The focal point is: what does school represent when there is a migration phenomenon?
Does it manage to act as a resource or is it one of the many obstacles to civil integration in the
single stories of many migrant families? The answer has to be constructed day after day. My experience, and when I say mine I mean to represent the experience of all the teachers and staff who
work with me, tells us that school can either welcome or reject. If a bureaucratic-administrative
58
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
attitude is prevalent, without understanding, listening, mediating, helping, informing correctly,
expecting, for example, complete family papers as a necessary requisite, then school is in fact
rejecting.
We have chosen to accept and to do so attentively, trying to guarantee maximum information on
rights and maximum help for needs, ranging from providing necessary tools for attending school
to supporting newcomers in learning the Italian language using the L2 methodology. The main
principle is only one: every single school age child living in any territory, just for the simple fact
that he is there and lives in that territory, has the right to education. It is a natural, primordial,
inalienable right. The application of this right in a modern state protected by a constitution
should be automatic. It should be the school’s mission as an institution and the school should
not have doubts or make distinctions, it should not be concerned about limiting or distributing
proportionately the number of immigrant pupils in order to safeguard “our” students’ learning.
A civilized country has to assign resources and ensure that schools, being social places, have all
the necessary conditions so that the presence of pupils of different origins becomes what it actually is: an enormous educational opportunity founded on the multifarious wealth of cultural
approaches, of interaction, of exercising citizenship skills. So, on a practical level, through the
curriculum, schools could become prime places where young generations adopt models of solidarity, acceptance and citizenship that can guarantee everybody’s rights and duties, without distinction of any kind, such as colour, sex, origin, religion or cultural traditions. This is a privileged
way of reform and of leading everyone to more shared models and to mutual tolerance. We
believe that the theme of reciprocity is particularly important. We can move away from the welfare and false goodness model by understanding our own advantages as “hosts”, answering not
only the question: what can I do to welcome you better? But also: how can you contribute to our
living together? Help me get to know you!
In any case, holding fast to our expressed principles, our school deals with all the daily problems:
pupils arriving in any month of the year, relationship difficulties with the families, who depend
and rely a lot on school, but do not manage to contribute much through participation because
of their unstable job situations. Last concern, but not least is Italian parents’ inclination of actually wondering, though in a civil way... will you manage to guarantee learning for all the students?
Nonetheless we have a reading of the phenomenon that confirms a fact: there is a process of
gradual stabilization. The number of pupils, born in Italy, who attend school regularly from
kindergarten onwards is growing and for them the only element of diversity lies in their foreign
surname.
To conclude, I would like to express a wish... that best practices will lead to a fairer world, more
concerned about rights. Inflexibility when it comes to rights can ensure their protection more
than any recommendation or solemn declaration, quite often sterile.
For further information visit our site: www.casadelsoleonline.it.
59
Save the Children is the world’s
leading independent children’s rights
organisation, with members
in 29 countries and operational
programmes in more than 120.
We fight for children’s rights and
deliver lasting improvements to
children’s lives worldwide.
Save the Children Italia Onlus
Headquarters
Via Volturno 58 - 00185 Rome
tel. +39 06 480 70 01
fax +39 06 480 70 039
[email protected]
Milan Office
Via Stresa, 3 - 20125 Milao
tel. +39 02 670 78 446
fax +39 02 671 99 525
[email protected]
www.savethechildren.it
60