Page 281 - Štremfel, Urška, ed., 2016. Student (Under)achievement: Perspectives, Approaches, Challenges. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut. Digital Library, Documenta 11.
P. 281
The aim of the analyses in this chapter of the paper was to present vari- 281
ous characteristics of students with the lowest civic knowledge achievement.
For this purpose, a group that did not attain the first proficiency level of civ-
ic knowledge was identified. There are about 9% of such students in Slovenia,
which means that the country is below the international ICCS average and that
the number of such students in Slovenia stands lower than the average for all
countries (or educational systems) in the study. The analysis of the ICCS data
exposed statistically significant differences in the majority of cases between
the lowest and the highest achieving groups in the field of civic knowledge,
and their attitudes and engagements. This means that the two groups of stu-
dents genuinely differ.
The lowest achieving students differ from the highest achieving students
in all aspects of their activity (debating political and social issues, participa-
tion in the community, participation in school) as well as from the second pro-
ficiency level group regarding participation in the community or school. They
more rarely debate social and political issues with their friends and parents
and participate less in school, but are, on the other hand, more active in the
local community. This leads to the conclusion that students who cannot han-
dle the basic principles and the wider concepts of citizenship, as well as having
no knowledge about the functioning of social, civic and political institutions,
on average participate to a lesser degree in school, talk less about such topics
with their friends and parents, but are already more active in participating in
the local community. Such activities might, of course, be more centred on their
own interests rather than the interests of community development. Neverthe-
less, the fundamental question that needs to be asked in that regard is ‘What
does the lack of participation in school and debating about social and politi-
cal issues mean?’. This is especially pertinent if we are aware of the importance
of the direct experience of participation as one of the components of civic and
social competencies. If we were to talk about educational practices within this
context, it would be in the form of a call to teachers to be aware of that and
try to include students to a greater degree in talks about political and social is-
sues and potentially combine the former with students’ experience of partic-
ipation in the wider community. According to Hahn (1998), school can devel-
op civic competences of the youth through direct teaching of social subjects,
active teaching methods, creation of a climate of trust and connectedness in
a classroom, as well as including students in the decision-making process on
education (Gril, 2011: 159). Extracurricular activities are a very important part
of acquired social knowledge (Gril, 2011). Another aspect of the issue is discus-
sions at home or with friends. The analysis stresses that students with the low-
est achievements in the area of civic knowledge talk less about social and po-
litical issues with their friends or parents, which means that they cannot get
this experience at home. One of the possible interpretations could also be that
facilitating civic knowledge – a path towards active citizenship
ous characteristics of students with the lowest civic knowledge achievement.
For this purpose, a group that did not attain the first proficiency level of civ-
ic knowledge was identified. There are about 9% of such students in Slovenia,
which means that the country is below the international ICCS average and that
the number of such students in Slovenia stands lower than the average for all
countries (or educational systems) in the study. The analysis of the ICCS data
exposed statistically significant differences in the majority of cases between
the lowest and the highest achieving groups in the field of civic knowledge,
and their attitudes and engagements. This means that the two groups of stu-
dents genuinely differ.
The lowest achieving students differ from the highest achieving students
in all aspects of their activity (debating political and social issues, participa-
tion in the community, participation in school) as well as from the second pro-
ficiency level group regarding participation in the community or school. They
more rarely debate social and political issues with their friends and parents
and participate less in school, but are, on the other hand, more active in the
local community. This leads to the conclusion that students who cannot han-
dle the basic principles and the wider concepts of citizenship, as well as having
no knowledge about the functioning of social, civic and political institutions,
on average participate to a lesser degree in school, talk less about such topics
with their friends and parents, but are already more active in participating in
the local community. Such activities might, of course, be more centred on their
own interests rather than the interests of community development. Neverthe-
less, the fundamental question that needs to be asked in that regard is ‘What
does the lack of participation in school and debating about social and politi-
cal issues mean?’. This is especially pertinent if we are aware of the importance
of the direct experience of participation as one of the components of civic and
social competencies. If we were to talk about educational practices within this
context, it would be in the form of a call to teachers to be aware of that and
try to include students to a greater degree in talks about political and social is-
sues and potentially combine the former with students’ experience of partic-
ipation in the wider community. According to Hahn (1998), school can devel-
op civic competences of the youth through direct teaching of social subjects,
active teaching methods, creation of a climate of trust and connectedness in
a classroom, as well as including students in the decision-making process on
education (Gril, 2011: 159). Extracurricular activities are a very important part
of acquired social knowledge (Gril, 2011). Another aspect of the issue is discus-
sions at home or with friends. The analysis stresses that students with the low-
est achievements in the area of civic knowledge talk less about social and po-
litical issues with their friends or parents, which means that they cannot get
this experience at home. One of the possible interpretations could also be that
facilitating civic knowledge – a path towards active citizenship
