Last month I published alongside my annual report a subject report on the development of citizenship in schools. The report celebrates the success of some schools in implementing the citizenship curriculum. It praises those schools where there have been substantial developments in the subject, and which now go a long way towards fulfilling national curriculum requirements. In the report we are critical of schools which have not taken citizenship seriously, either through reluctance or lack of capacity to make appropriate provision in the curriculum. Citizenship is marginalized in the curriculum in one fifth of schools. It is less well established in the curriculum than other subjects, and less well taught and some critics have seized on this as a reason for wanting to step back from supporting it. Yet, the progress made to date by the more committed schools suggests that the reasons for introducing citizenship are both worthwhile and can be fulfilled, given the time and resources. Indeed, those reasons are given added weight by national and global events of the past few months. While not claiming too much, citizenship can address core skills, attitudes and values that young people need to consider as they come to terms with a changing world.
Criticism of citizenship education in schools argues that merely teaching children about the theory of citizenship education is ineffective, unless schools themselves reflect democratic practices by giving children opportunities to have a say over decision making. It suggests that schools are fundamentally undemocratic institutions, and such a setting cannot instill the commitment and belief in democratic values in children, which is necessary for citizenship education to have a proper impact.
