Page 59 - Šolsko polje, XXX, 2019, št. 5-6: Civic, citizenship and rhetorical education in a rapidly changing world, eds. Janja Žmavc and Plamen Mirazchiyski
P. 59
m. banjac ■ knowledge on political participation among basic school pupils
small town. The pupils were asked to correctly identify what kind of polit-
ical non-conventional (civic) action was used. The correct answer among
several given was “petition”.
Within this cluster, there was a high discrepancy between the per-
centage of correct answers on two different questions. While pupils had
many difficulties in explaining what political demonstrations are, they
did well in correctly identifying an unconventional type of political par-
ticipation. Of course, the immediate question is why such a difference,
given that both questions addressed the same topic (unconventional
forms of participation). One of the possible answers to this is the type of
task given. The task Q7 demanded a short written answer, while Q8 was
a multiple-choice task. As already said, pupils usually solve the latter more
successfully. Having said that, it is striking that pupils are so limited in
finding the correct descriptive answer to a question at the first taxonomic
level, which means that their political literacy in unconventional political
participation is at least questionable.
Conclusion
With regard to the issue of the youth’s political participation, citizenship
education, within formal education system, is in, one can say, a turbu-
lent and contradictory position. On the one hand, democratic states still
predominantly, if not exclusively, rest on the representative political sys-
tem that cannot do without traditional participatory mechanisms such
as voting. On the other, heterogeneous voices, including young people,
exhort dissatisfaction with conventional liberal democratic participatory
means and frequently resort to novel democratic forms of participation,
including those that are now classically identified as unconventional (Pit-
ti, 2019). As has been suggested,
political action is changing in form, from consisting of mainly elec-
tion-based activities to encompassing a wide repertoire of both these
more traditional, institutionalised activities and extra-institutional, di-
rect forms of political action […] (Rooij and Reeskens, 2014, p. 185).
And schools never operate in vacuum. Biesta (2008, p. 170) reminds us
that schools are as such continually mandated to revitalise citizenship,
“often fuelled by concerns about decreasing levels of civic participation
and political involvement”.
This article suggests that although citizenship education within for-
mal education is in the context of its mandate to raise the youth’s interest
in participation frequently submerged into depoliticised discourse where
any kind of public activity of individuals or groups is deemed active cit-
57
small town. The pupils were asked to correctly identify what kind of polit-
ical non-conventional (civic) action was used. The correct answer among
several given was “petition”.
Within this cluster, there was a high discrepancy between the per-
centage of correct answers on two different questions. While pupils had
many difficulties in explaining what political demonstrations are, they
did well in correctly identifying an unconventional type of political par-
ticipation. Of course, the immediate question is why such a difference,
given that both questions addressed the same topic (unconventional
forms of participation). One of the possible answers to this is the type of
task given. The task Q7 demanded a short written answer, while Q8 was
a multiple-choice task. As already said, pupils usually solve the latter more
successfully. Having said that, it is striking that pupils are so limited in
finding the correct descriptive answer to a question at the first taxonomic
level, which means that their political literacy in unconventional political
participation is at least questionable.
Conclusion
With regard to the issue of the youth’s political participation, citizenship
education, within formal education system, is in, one can say, a turbu-
lent and contradictory position. On the one hand, democratic states still
predominantly, if not exclusively, rest on the representative political sys-
tem that cannot do without traditional participatory mechanisms such
as voting. On the other, heterogeneous voices, including young people,
exhort dissatisfaction with conventional liberal democratic participatory
means and frequently resort to novel democratic forms of participation,
including those that are now classically identified as unconventional (Pit-
ti, 2019). As has been suggested,
political action is changing in form, from consisting of mainly elec-
tion-based activities to encompassing a wide repertoire of both these
more traditional, institutionalised activities and extra-institutional, di-
rect forms of political action […] (Rooij and Reeskens, 2014, p. 185).
And schools never operate in vacuum. Biesta (2008, p. 170) reminds us
that schools are as such continually mandated to revitalise citizenship,
“often fuelled by concerns about decreasing levels of civic participation
and political involvement”.
This article suggests that although citizenship education within for-
mal education is in the context of its mandate to raise the youth’s interest
in participation frequently submerged into depoliticised discourse where
any kind of public activity of individuals or groups is deemed active cit-
57
