teaching citizenship journal / issue 33 / summer 2012

teamwork

proposition

TEACHING

that’s————DEBATABLE————

!

responsestrategy

facts

timing stylelogic

rightsopposition listening

structure

roleplay

Also inside this issue —Palestine & Israel / page 16Cultural di�erences / page 18Parliamentary formats / page 20

Planning assessment / page 27Citizenship in fe / page 30Multicultural democracies / p 32Reviews, resources and more...

Journal of the Association for Citizenship Teachingwww.teachingcitizenship.org.uk

Issue No 33Summer 2012

“argument isat the heart

of citizenship

”

flexibility

preparation

‘Rights & Responsibilities’National Citizenship Education Conference 2012Tuesday 3 July 20129.30 am – 4.00 pm

University of London UnionMalet Street, London WC1

To find out more and book your place, see: www.teachingcitizenship.org.uk/events orwww.eventbrite.co.uk/event/1922308677

Theme: Debate04 Editorial Debate at the heart of citizenship by Harold Raitt & Andrew McCallum08 Introducing debate in the citizenship classroom Debbie Newman suggests effective debate formats10 Key aspects of debate Various authors on significant elements of debate 14 “This House believes that debating is the best mechanism for teaching Citizenship” A debate with Andrew Fitch v Anna Liddle 16 Debating in a conflict zone Andrew McCallum on Palestine and Israel18 Cultural differences and debating How identity shapes debating conventions by Alfred C Snider20 Parliamentary debate in different countries Harold Raitt on how formats impact the conduct of debate

Lesson Plans22 Parliamentary debates in London, Edinburgh and Berlin A medium term plan about the relationship between style and substance by Harold Raitt25 Useful debating links Key web destinations to support your teaching

Features & Research27 Assessing Citizenship is easier when you’ve planned for it Marcus Bhargava & Liz Moorse respond to Lorellie Canning’s article30 A decade of progress under threat Rob Pope reports on the uncertainties faced by citizenship in FE32 Teaching for citizenship in multicultural democracies Investigation of changes in Europe by Carole L Hahn

Reviews, Resources & Regulars26 Diary of a debate debutante (part three) Trisha Manktelow puts her society to the test36 Pros and Cons: A debater’s handbook 37 Vegetarianism: A Project Book For Schools Reviews by Lee Jerome38 ACTually... rights and responsibilities by Lee Jerome

Published by the Association for Citizenship Teaching, 63 Gee Street, London ec1v 3rs Email [email protected] | Telephone +44 (0)20 7253 0051 (note new number!)

www.teachingcitizenship.org.uk / Summer 2012 / Issue 33 / Teaching Citizenship / 3

Editorial notesTalk is at the heart of many of the most effective Citizenship class-rooms and in this edition we explore one specific way in which talk can be structured, scaffolded and promoted through Citizenship. Our guest editors, Harold Raitt and Andrew McCallum, have pulled together a fascinating series of articles and teaching ideas which explore debate as a powerful teaching and learning strategy. I would like to thank them for a thought-provoking edition, and of course to thank Tricia Manktelow for the final instalment of her debate diary – I hope between them they inspire readers to do more debating.

Elsewhere in the journal Rob Pope reviews the situation in FE, Carole Hahn reports on her com-parative work in Europe, and Marcus Bhargava and Liz Moorse respond to Lorrellei Canning’s recent article on assessment. I hope you find plenty to stimulate debate here, and of course I hope that many of you will join us for ACT’s forthcoming annual con-ference where the debates continue. Lee Jerome, [email protected]

Design notes – call for entriesSince our relaunch last Autumn the quality of writing in Teaching Citizenship has gone from strength to strength. Sourcing excellent images to illustrate this content appropriately can sometimes be challenging, however. Are you a budding photographer or illustrator with experience or interest in education? Do you know anyone who is? Would you like to get your work published? If so, get in touch!Lionel Openshaw, Design & Production [email protected]

Contents

© 2012 Association for Citizenship Teaching (ACT)ISSN 1474-9335No part of this publication may be reproduced, copied

or transmitted in any form or by any means without the permission of the publisher. Teaching Citizenship is the official journal of ACT.

The views expressed in signed articles do not necessarily represent those of ACT, and we cannot accept responsibility for any products

or services advertised within the journal. Printed and distributed by Premier Print Group: www.premier printgroup.com.

Summer2012

16

25

32

4 / Teaching Citizenship / Issue 33 / Summer 2012 / www.teachingcitizenship.org.uk

This edition focuses on the importance of using debate in citizenship education, as outlined by guest editors Harold Raitt and Andrew McCallum.

s guest editors we support this motion. A good ‘First Proposi-tion’ speaker always starts by defining the motion, so we must specify what we mean by debate for the purposes of this issue. Is it simply dis-cussing the relative merits of different

points of view? This happens everyday in every classroom, playground and living room, and seems a weak definition, especially viewed against the National Curriculum’s Key Pro-cess 2.2a to use ‘formal debate’ from KS3 onwards. What is a formal debate? The BBC’s Ques-tion Time is a popular format with a standard set of proce-dures. So are some discussions on Newsnight. But we have chosen (as a First Proposition speaker would just be within his or her rights to do) to focus even more closely on ‘formal parliamentary debate’ as such formats have obvious relevance to the politically-focused as-pects of Citizenship. That is not to say that we ignore alterna-tive perspectives. Such an ap-proach would place us outside

the remit of formal debate itself, whereby every proposi-tion must have an opposition.

Some of the connotations of formal parliamentary debate place it at odds with the egali-tarian principles of Citizen-ship teaching: namely that it is deeply rooted in the public school and Oxbridge tradition, with a focus on high-achieving students. However, the current reality on the ground chal-lenges such notions. There are, for example, numerous cases of fantastic practice in schools in areas of social disadvan-tage. This is partly due to the impact of debating organisa-tions working alongside such schools, but it is largely due to committed teachers using parliamentary debate as a valuable pedagogical strategy, both to promote knowledge and understanding of Citizen-ship issues and to give students the skills to explore them. Our focus, then, is very much on debate as it relates to actual classroom practice.

Debbie Newman gets us started by outlining how to introduce debate into the Citizenship classroom. Of most use to the uninitiated, her article still contains new ideas for the more experienced. It is followed by an ambitious attempt to outline the key ele-ments that need to be consid-ered when using debate in any context; in Citizenship, in other National Curriculum subjects,

or as part of an extra-curricular activity. ‘Key aspects of debate’ draws on the ideas and exper-tise of a panel of some of the UK’s leading debate educators. Proceedings are then livened up with the reproduction of an email exchange on the motion:

“This House believes that debat-ing is the best mechanism for teaching Citizenship”. Andrew Fitch argues powerfully in favour, while Anna Liddle’s robust response details alterna-tive teaching strategies.

The final three articles have an international perspec-tive. Andrew McCallum talks to Jess Dix about her experi-ence of training youth leaders in Palestine and Israel to use debate. They explore how lessons learned there can be transferred to UK classrooms. Alfred C Snider then draws on his experience of training debaters in 38 countries to out-line the different approaches of different cultures, before Har-old Raitt offers an engaging overview of how parliamentary debate is structured in London, Edinburgh and Berlin.

We hope that this issue in some ways stimulates a ‘debate about debate’. We have out-lined different elements of for-mal parliamentary approaches, while freely admitting that al-ternatives exist that are equally and sometimes more effective. We welcome comments from readers be they supportive, op-positional, or non-partisan. ▪

‘This House believes that debate lies at the heart of citizenship education’

Editorial

We hope that this issue in some way stimulates a ‘debate about debate’

Andrew McCallum is Senior Lecturer in Education at London Metropolitan University, and author of The Complete Citizenship Resource File. Harold Raitt has worked in education departments at the English-Speaking Union and National Theatre and is now Director of Johannes Factotum & Friends a group of inter-disciplinary arts, media and education experts: www.johannesfactotum.com.

Order free resources from the Vegetarian Societyincluding the new Project Book for Schools designed for Key Stage 3 and 4 project work in a number of subjects, from food technology to citizenship. The Vegetarian Society is aneducational charity with a range of free resources and activities for use in the classroom. Visit www.youngveggie.org or contact [email protected] to find out more.

The Vegetarian Society • charity number: 259358 • 0161 925 2000 • [email protected]

Is vegetarianism good for society?

VegSoc-Citizenship-Ad:Layout 1 05/04/2012 16:49 Page 1

Linked to the Citizenship and PSHE curriculum, On Your Wavelength uses the charity’s lifesaving work as a stimulus for learning. Young people develop the skills to understand and manage risk, find out how to stay safe on and around the water, and learn about volunteering and the role of the RNLI.

Visit rnli.org.uk/wavelength to download or order the teacher’s guide and to access a range of multimedia support material. Find more free educational resources and information about the RNLI’s outreach work at rnli.org.uk/education.

The new, free teaching resource for Key Stage 3 from the RNLI

Children’s Commissioner to open ACT ConferenceOur national conference for teach-ers and school leaders takes place on Tuesday 3 July, in London. The Chil-dren’s Commissioner will open the conference which provides an oppor-tunity to hear about her role, current legislation and to reflect on what children should be taught about their rights. The rest of the day offers something for all those delivering Citizenship education – whatever their level of teaching experience.

There will be a varied pro-gramme of workshops presenting ideas that can be taken straight into the classroom the following day. There will also be a marketplace where attendees can see and sample the latest teaching resources.

Attendees will also be able to develop skills and ideas, and can attend primary or secondary specific workshops. Other workshops will ad-dress the conference theme of rights and responsibilities – and will ex-plore how learning about rights and responsibilities fits into the primary or secondary curriculum and beyond. For full details and booking see www.teachingcitizenship.org.uk.

Thinking Creatively: ACT North East CPD This day of professional develop-ment, taking place on Wednesday 30 May in Peterlee, is titled The Changing Shape of Citizenship – Thinking Creatively. Aimed at teach-ers delivering Citizenship education at primary or secondary level, it will demonstrate how to inspire pupils and improve whole school develop-ment through effective Citizenship education. This event is hosted by ACT North East and is particularly devised to support teachers in north-ern England. Lunch and a resource pack will be provided.

The event will examine how Citizenship contributes to the SMSC aspects of Ofsted, explore how the EBac can be enhanced through Citizenship, and identify how the changes in Citizenship education can benefit your school and pupils

ACT reaches out to LebanonStarting later in 2012, ACT will be involved in a project developing Citizenship education in Lebanon. The project is being coordinated by the Institute for Education and we will be working closely with them and with the Centre for Lebanese Studies at Cambridge University. ACT’s main role will be reviewing national text books, teacher train-ing, the curriculum, materials and ITT and making recommendations. For further details contact [email protected].

Staff changes at ACT head officeACT’s Finance & Membership Officer of four years, Anna Amanuel, has moved on to pastures new and we wish her well. The team in the office currently comprises Millicent Scott, Development Manager and Chris Waller, Professional Officer.

Keep an eye on the ACT website for information about new staff members joining the team: www.teachingcitizenship.org.uk.

Recruitment drive for new members of the ACT CouncilThe ACT Council aims to have mem-bers from across the country acting as representatives for their area and there are still some gaps at present. The Council usually meets three or four times a year.

If you feel that you could contrib-ute to the development of ACT’s work and its role in supporting teachers, and are interested in being a Coun-cil member, please contact the ACT Office, email: [email protected] or telephone: 020 7253 0051. Alternatively, come and meet some of the Council members at the national conference in the summer or at one of our regional events.

Events & News Compiled by Sheila Clark on behalf of ACT Council. Share info and news about forthcoming events – email: [email protected].


Questions in ParliamentOn February 14 Lord Harries of Pentregarth asked the government to clarify their evaluation of current policies on citizenship education. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Schools (Lord Hill of Oareford) replied:

“My Lords, Ofsted reported in 2010 that citizenship education is improving. Our reforms are designed to build on this by giving greater autonomy to schools… Although the expert panel that reported to us in December suggests that Citizen-ship should form part of the basic curriculum rather than the national curriculum, the first sentence in its report emphasises the importance of Citizenship and I very much share that view. The issue – and this is true of a number of subjects that are subject to the national curricu-lum review – is the extent to which we need to be prescriptive around programmes of study. We will reflect upon what the expert panel has said and take other representations into account, and then bring forward our proposals in due course in the light of that… We should want every child to be able to study Citizenship. One aspect is the importance of knowing about voting, as my noble friend says, but there are many other benefits of learning about Citizenship as well. The issue is not its importance as a subject but how it is best delivered in the curriculum.”

Peace & protest through music If you’re thinking about how to de-velop a fun summer event or theme week linked to Citizenship in school and want to build cross-curricular links, then consider World Music Day on June 21st. The aim of this day is “to build peace worldwide by the means of music”. You could explore all sorts of links with human rights, freedom of expression and also take a look at protests happening around the world. There’s a lot of protest music out there! For more info see: www.europeanmusicday.eu.

If you want to know more about freedom of expression and music then also check out the Music Freedom website: www.musicfreedomday.org.

For lesson plans (for all key stages) with global links and more about protest music, see the Oxfam website: www.oxfam.org.uk/education/resources/global _ music _ lesson _ plans.

Also watch out for ‘Oxjam’ com-ing up later in the year too. Every October hundreds of amazing Oxjam events happen across the UK organ-ised by anyone and everyone! For more on their ‘secret’ gigs, competi-tions, advice from industry experts, and to find out how to get involved, check out their website: www.oxfam.org.uk/Oxjam.

Heads Up with HansardThere’s still time to get involved in the final two debates for this aca-demic year via the Hansard Society’s online debating space ‘HeadsUp’. It’s a great way to raise political aware-ness in young people and encourage active participation through discus-sion with their peers, helping them to understand the effect that demo-cratic processes have on their lives.

The online forum is carefully moderated by Hansard and is open to all young people between the ages of 11-18. Their viewpoints are shared with their peers and decision-makers across the country. It also gives politicians a chance to consult with young people and discover their ideas, experiences and what they really think about things.

The final two debates for this academic year are: You and Society (April 30 - May 18, 2012); and Olympic and Paralympic Games (June 18 - July 6, 2012). To take part, see: www.hansardsociety.org.uk.

Celebrate the right to play!

‘Playday’ (1 August 2012) is the national day for play in the UK, and is a campaign that highlights the importance of play in children’s lives and raises awareness about children’s right to play. Have some fun and find out more at their website: www.playday.org.uk/play-day _ campaigns.aspx.

Sheila is a professional trainer, regional subject advisor, ACT Council Member, partner in an educational consultancy business and is involved in the teaching of Citizenship and PSHE at The King Edward VI School, Morpeth, Northumberland.



Introducing debate in the citizenship classroomEffective debate teaching requires a strong knowledge of the format and careful planning, as outlined by Debbie Newman.

Where do debates fit in? It is hard to think of a single Citizen-ship issue that could not be ap-proached through debate. Should we lower the voting age? Do we need quotas for women and ethnic minorities in parliament, business or universities? Should we support local causes over international ones? Can young people effect change in their communities? All three of the Key Concepts in the National Curriculum Programme of Study for Citizenship can be explored in this way. Formal debate is also a Key Process (Advo-cacy and Representation 2.2a explic-itly and 2.2b,c and d implicitly) – it is both the subject’s means and its end.

It is possible to start any unit with a debate to introduce issues and get pupils thinking. Equally it can be used at the end a scheme of work to consolidate and review learning. If teachers select a different group of pupils each time, they can ensure everyone gets a turn throughout the year. Speakers’ contributions can be assessed with the rigour and serious-ness of written work, with marks contributing towards overall end-of-year assessment. If doing examined Citizenship a debate makes an excel-lent revision lesson. What do you need for a formal debate?First you need a topic, called a mo-tion. This stays the same throughout

the debate, setting it apart from general discussion activities, which might start on one issue and mean-der into something related or even totally different. An example of a motion might be “This House would ban religious symbols in school” or “This House believes that one person can make a difference to the world”. The phrase ‘This House…’ is used because debates are modelled on the debates in the Houses of Parliament.

Second you need two teams – for and against, called Proposition and the Opposition. The teams should have three speakers each and might also have additional members who are helping to prepare but not speaking in the debate. Sides can be selected according to different cri-teria; personally I allocate the sides regardless of their own opinions.

Finally you need a chairperson (who keeps order and calls on the speakers when it is their turn), a timekeeper (who will time the speeches – a good recommendation is three minutes for KS3, four minutes for KS4 and five minutes for KS5) and an audi-ence (the rest of the class and/or another class who will listen, make points in the audience debate and ultimately vote on the motion).

When setting up the classroom for a formal debate you need three tables at the front of the room– one in the middle with two chairs for the chairperson and timekeeper, and one on each side with three chairs for the speakers. The tables should be in a V shape to show that the speakers are sparring against each other but hop-ing to win over the audience.

Theme: Debate

Chair Time-keeper

OppositionProposition

Audience


Speaking order is as follows:First PropositionFirst OppositionSecond PropositionSecond OppositionAudience PointsOpposition SummaryProposition Summary

Apart from the first proposition speaker, everyone is expected to listen and respond to the arguments of the previous speaker. This is called rebuttal. The second speakers on each side should have new argu-ments rather than repeating their team-mate’s points. The summary speakers respond to the points of the audience and sum up the main arguments in the debate but do not introduce any new ideas.

A formal debate is a flexible tool, which can be adapted to suit differ-ent ages and class sizes, with adjust-ments made according to available time and classroom layout. One for-mat is described here which has been shown to be effective in a classroom setting; once you are confident you can shorten speeches, add speakers or tinker in any way which suits your objectives – just remember to keep the same number of speakers and the same overall time for both sides in the interests of fairness. One easy change is to leave out the summary speeches and to finish with a ques-tion and answer session between the audience and the speakers instead.

More interaction?If you want to further develop the active listening and critical think-ing skills of your pupils, introduce points of information. These allow the debaters to try and interrupt the speaker with a piece of rebuttal and therefore incentivise continual close listening. To do this any speaker on the other side should stand up and say “point of information” and wait. The speaker decides whether to say “accepted” or “rejected”. If they

reject, the offerer must sit down quietly. If they accept, the offerer has 5-15 seconds to make their point and then sit down. The speaker should address the point directly before returning to their speech. Points of information are not allowed during the first thirty and last thirty seconds of speeches (the timekeeper should knock at these times) or at any point during the summary speeches.

What do the rest of the class do during the debate?Members of the class not involved directly in the debate constitute the audience. They have the opportunity to take part in the audience debate (or you could mandate certain pupils to contribute) and they ultimately vote on the debate. In some classes this is enough but in most situations you will want to incentivise and fa-cilitate greater attention and partici-pation. You could do this in a num-ber of ways including: using peer assessment sheets to enable pupils to judge the debate, or appointing class journalists to write up or present a report of the debate afterwards.

You will need to decide whether you want your audience to be silent or whether they are allowed to clap and/or give verbal feedback in the form of “hear, hear” or “shame” and brief them accordingly. Audience participation is often a useful way of maintaining interest and keeping everyone on their toes.

Preparing the class for a debate Before debating for the first time, a class needs to be introduced to the format and rules of debate and given support in how to prepare. For any subsequent debates they can pre-pare themselves either in class or as homework. Pro forma sheets help scaffold the work and encourage a clear structure. Planning should be designed so that debaters can, ulti-mately, present naturally from notes rather than reading out scripts. ▪

Debbie Newman is Director of The Noisy Classroom. She is a former Head of Speech & Debate at the English-Speaking Union and has taught English and Citizenship in Southend-on-Sea. For more resources, videos etc see www.noisyclassroom.com.

Divide the class into four groups (two sets of Proposition and Opposition, speaking on one or two different motions).

Step 1: Brainstorm ideas• Individual brainstorm – allow five minutes silent time for this.• Group brainstorm – bring to-gether all the individual ideas.

Step 2: Organise ideas• Choose the best points (leave aside any duplicated ones) until you have a list of about six. Give each one a name no longer than three words.• Then divide these arguments between the speakers. The first and second speakers should have three arguments. The summary speaker does not have any new arguments.

Step 3: Structure the speechesEach speech should have:1. Introduction – who are you and what do you stand for?2. Preview – What are the names of the points you are going to cover?3. Rebuttal4. Point One5. Point Two6. Point Three7. Remind the audience of the three points you have covered8. Vote for us

Step 4: Prepare the speechesArguments should be fleshed out using a structure such as ‘pee’ (Point, Example, Explain) or ‘real’ (Reason, Evidence, Analysis, Link).

Step 5: Prepare the rest of classWhile the main speakers finalise their notes, see ‘What do the rest of the class do?’, above, for ideas.

Five steps to preparing a debate

Theme: Debate


Key aspects of debate

Various contributors highlight the most significant elements that make for a good debate

PropositionProposition is often perceived as the more challenging side in debat-ing, requiring speakers to present more positive material and depend less on destroying the other side’s arguments. However, it also presents significant opportunities. ‘Prop’ speakers set the scene, defining any ambiguous terms in the motion, describing the problem they are trying to solve and setting out the important issues in the debate. Not only does this give them a measure of control over the debate, but it also provides one of the best opportuni-ties to deploy stylish rhetoric to good effect; tremendous fun and very impressive if done well. James Torrance reached the Quarter Finals of both the World Champion-ships and European Championships before graduating from Nottingham University in 2010. He is currently training to be an accountant and is a mentor for Debate Mate.

Opposition Opposing a motion is inherently more destructive than proposing, but it is not enough just to rebut the proposition’s arguments. The opposi-tion must explain why the motion is a bad idea, perhaps because it is un-ethical or will have negative conse-quences. In this way, the opposition reflect their counterparts in Parlia-ment. However, unlike in politics, it is not incumbent on the opposition

in a school or university debate to have a better idea. Alternatives sug-gested by the opposition often con-fuse and complicate debates, making them less enjoyable for all involved.

It is not always clear how the proposition will define a motion or what arguments they will use, giving the opposition very little time to re-spond. It is therefore particularly im-portant to listen carefully and adapt arguments quickly when speaking in opposition; key skills that apply to all positions but which are most useful to an opening opposition speaker.James Torrance

Role playIn formal debates participants are given the side of a topic that they will have to argue. This will often require them to engage with issues they haven’t considered before, or to argue against the position they personally hold. The old saw about walking a mile in another man’s shoes gains new power and impact when you are being asked to argue his case from his point of view. This exercise can change people’s minds on issues, giving greater under-standing and increased empathy for those with differing points of view. It also forces learners to examine the strength of their own pre-held beliefs and consider why they are held. The outcomes of debates on homework or school punishments can be eye-opening for students and teachers!Gavin Illsley competed at the highest levels both at school and university, and was European Champion in 2006. He currently works training debaters, from beginners to the international elite.

FactsFacts are clearly very important in a debate. Knowing what the issues are, how many people are affected, or to what extent, is the difference between a discussion about a prob-lem and a debate about the best solution. Debates challenge students to select useful and relevant facts and help to reinforce the impor-tance of identifying the source of their information as in a debate they will often be challenged on it. It is important to remember though that facts very rarely win or lose a debate. A useful approach with students is to explain that facts are used to “hang their arguments and ideas upon” but they are not the debate itself. A useful training technique is to set a topic and get students to bring in 10 facts from different sources and then have a group discussion about which three they would use and why.Jason Vit is Head of Speech & Debate at the English-Speaking Union.

LogicLogic forms the bedrock of any good, rational debate. Without it we have no tools to show that we’re correct and the other side is wrong. By fo-cusing on logic within an argument we’re forced to analyse deeper what we’re saying. Instead of simply as-serting claims, a good debater breaks down each claim, explaining why one follows from another. Eventually we ought to reach something univer-sally accepted that can’t be argued against (eg. murder is wrong). How-ever, we rarely prove things during a debate in the same way that we do in mathematics or science – if we


could prove something definitively, it wouldn’t be a fair or interesting de-bate. Instead we usually aim to show what will happen or what should happen, relying on the intuition and experience of the audience to show how our arguments are consistent with things we all agree with. Logic allows us to place the stepping stones from axioms we agree with to the claims we use to persuade people.James Dixon is a PhD student in mathematical logic at the University of Manchester, former training director of the Manchester Debating Union and current Debate Mate mentor.

PreparationAs I explore in my article on pages 20-24, our politicians have vary-ing lengths of time to prepare for debates; the Chancellor will work for weeks preparing every word of his budget speech, but the Foreign Secretary might have only minutes to prepare a statement on a fast-developing situation abroad.

So it is with classroom and extra-curricular debates. ‘Long-prep’ debates – with the opportunity to work on a topic in class, take a mo-tion away as homework and consult libraries and the internet – are very appropriate for novice debaters. ‘Short-prep’ debates (ubiquitous at university levels and in extra-curric-ular schools competitions organised by university societies) require stu-dents to speak for up to five minutes with only 15 minutes of preparation. Of course, success at short-prep is based on extensive knowledge of identical or similar topics gained beforehand, either in debates or

through wider research. This also makes it an ideal format for revising topics with exam classes; shorten the prep time to the length of time you suggest students should be using as planning time in the exam hall, and then get them to deliver a speech length roughly equivalent to the length of an average essay. However, experienced debaters should be wary of getting hooked on the adrenalin of only speaking in short-prep debates lest they lose their appreciation for rhetorical finesse and exhaustively researched arguments. On the other hand, asking even absolute begin-ners to deliver a few sentences ex-tempore can be a useful confidence-building tool if backed with a safety net provided by a ‘phone a friend’ or ‘ask the audience’ card.Harold Raitt has worked extensively in developing classroom debating in the UK and abroad.

FlexibilityHowever long a student prepares for, a fully written out speech is fatal; it’s like setting a player’s feet in concrete at the beginning of a basketball match. All debaters should be ac-cepting Points of Information during their speeches, yet once they’ve taken one, their answer will have taken them to a point which might be quite far removed from where they were before the interruption. Furthermore, speakers after the First Proposition have no idea of how pre-ceding speakers will have reshaped the playing field.

Speaking from notes is the only answer. Far from being an inacces-sible higher-order skill, if this is

presented to classes as an obvious fait accompli (necessary for the reasons given above, and desirable because it reduces the amount they have to write down), they will revel in the freedom it gives them. A good training exercise – which also drives home the flexibility point – is to take a point written out in note form and deliver it three times, but with a ‘game-changing’ alteration before each repetition such as “the previous speaker said ...” or “the motion has actually been defined to mean ...”.Harold Raitt

ListeningWe seldom imagine a person who enjoys debating to be a good listener. Someone who likes the sound of their own voice seems nearer the mark. But the most enjoyable aspects of debating require good listening. To take apart your opponent’s argu-ment, you need first to have listened, and then, to have understood it.

‘Flowing’ a debate, as they call it in the trade, is crucial. The de-bater divides their notepaper into a column for each of the other speak-ers, in which they note that speaker’s arguments. They then draw lines from column to column, tracking the progress of each argument during the debate. This will help them iden-tify the key issues to engage with and rebut. Good debaters will under-stand the other team’s arguments as well as they do their own.Sam Kitchener writes for publications such as the Spectator, the Literary Re-view and the Huffington Post. He was also a member of the ESU England Schools Debating Team.


Theme: DebateKey aspects of debate

ResponseResponding during a debate is

one of the biggest challenges which speakers face. Points of Informa-tion (short challenges offered to the person speaking by an opponent) are unpredictable and being able to come up with a spontaneous answer is not easy. One of the best ways to help students prepare is to have a clear simple team-line, in effect expressing the team’s entire case in 1-3 lines. This helps them to be clear on any logical or philosophical chal-lenges. Another useful way to train is to get students to give a speech in practice, while taking a question every 45 seconds. Rebuttal is another area of response; engaging directly with what the previous speaker has said as a part of a speaker’s actual speech. Learning to pick out the key ideas and taking effective notes are skills that develop over time, helped by feedback from judges and audience.Jason Vit

StructureFor novice debaters, not yet fully confident nor grown into their own style, adhering to rules of structure enables their speech to come across more clearly and makes it easier for the audience (and judges in a compe-tition) to understand, so:1. Tell them what you are going to say; list off your points. This will force you to think up appropriate labels for them, which will in turn force you to structure them logically.

2.Then say it; the ‘substantive’ part of your speech should elaborate on the headings, providing an explanation of what you mean, analysis of why this should be so, and illustration (examples) of how this operates in analogous situations.3. Tell them you’ve said it; sum-marise your points briefly so that the audience and judges are left in no doubt about your contribution.Irene McGrath is Head of Academic Administration at the High School of Dundee. Her debating society has produced three World Schools Debating Champions, and she was 2011 Convenor of the World Schools Championships.

TimingTiming helps speakers keep to their planned structure. The further down the table you go, the more you will be rebutting and the less you will be introducing new points, until the summary speeches where there is no new material. You could draw up an arithmetical table of this – varying according to the style of the debat-ing format you’re using – and make yourself stick to it until it becomes automatic. You must also ensure that your substantive arguments appear in your speech before the signal for the last (protected) minute; this not only conforms to the rule that your opponents must have the opportuni-ty to challenge your points, but also forces you to give each point enough time for it to be properly explained.Irene McGrath

TeamworkJust as parties are central to modern politics, doing well in a debate is all about teamwork. Sharing knowledge in a short-prep debate, or dividing up areas of research in a long-prep one are useful ways for students to learn the value of shared work and cooper-ation. For the debate itself there are different roles which require differ-ent strengths; perhaps clarity for first proposition, or responsiveness for the first opposition. Students quickly recognise that different people are better suited to different roles. As a team they all need to listen to what is being said, so in their own speeches they can help to clarify issues or deal with challenges which have gone un-answered. In a classroom context, it can be helpful to work in a big group to identify lots of arguments and then get teams to work together to divide the ideas up. The useful part of the exercise is getting them to ex-plain why they’ve divided ideas up in a certain way before asking the class to suggest any better combinations. In an extra-curricular context it is useful to keep a team together for a few debates so they can build a good team dynamic. It is important that a team should always get any feedback together and that after a debate they should have a short discussion about how they did and what they can improve upon. Jason Vit


StrategyDebating is at its heart a game of strategy. In selecting and develop-ing arguments teams must not only show why their arguments are true but why they are the most relevant and important arguments in the debate. They should consider how individual arguments affect the whole case: do they contradict an earlier argument? Do individual arguments flow and combine to form a logical and coherent case? When responding to the opposing side debaters should not respond to every argument, they need only respond to the most relevant and important ones. The most strategically minded team will not just respond to an indi-vidual piece of evidence or example, or show an argument to cause more harm than good, they’ll successfully attack the very premise or founda-tion of an argument.Ben Jasper is a former European debat-ing finalist and has been the Chief Ad-judicator at the Oxford Schools Debat-ing Competition and the International Competition for Young Debaters. He is one of the coaches of the ESU England Schools Team’s Development Squad.

StyleWhat we say is key, but how we say it is absolutely essential to ensuring the message isn’t lost on the way to the eyes and the ears of the audience. One of the most memorable scenes in the recent film The Iron Lady is Mrs Thatcher receiving coaching

to change her voice; a good teacher today need never suggest that a debater has to pretend to be anyone other than his or herself, but mak-ing sure they speak clearly and with good variation in pace, tone and volume (appropriate to the subject in hand, where possible) can help their true character shine through. Body language should enhance, not distract; wildly flailing arms distract from the message as much as deliv-ering timidly with a hanging head and shuffling feet.Harold Raitt

RightsIn an argument, people can express disagreements, but they have no right to be heard – other people can talk over or ignore their opponents. In contrast, speakers in a debate have a right not only to be heard, but also to speak, uninterrupted if they choose, for exactly the same length of time as their opponents, making debating fairer than arguing (and also more pleasant)!

It is the Chairperson’s job to en-sure speakers’ rights are respected. This means stopping those who are not speaking from interrupting other speakers without their consent, talk-ing out of turn, or cheering or booing overly-enthusiastically. The tradi-tional way to do this is to bang the table (with a gavel, if you have one) and shout “order” until the errant debaters are quiet.Ashleigh Lamming is a Debate Mate

mentor for Cardinal Pole RC School. She has previously convened two of the UK’s largest schools debating competi-tions, and represented the University of Cambridge at the World Universities Debating Championships.

ResponsibilitiesA debater’s right to be heard comes with responsibilities. However, the beauty of debating is that these responsibilities are wonderfully aligned with strategic interests. De-baters have a responsibility to listen to other speakers in a debate, and a responsibility not to talk over them – but it is also very much in their interest to do so. How can you rebut another speaker’s argument if you were not listening to what they said? Likewise, speakers have a responsi-bility to be respectful in their speech and avoid personally insulting other speakers – but then it is far more per-suasive to cleverly demolish the logic of an argument than it is to assert another speaker is stupid. Speakers are punished for ignoring their re-sponsibilities by losing debates, and are rewarded for upholding them by winning more often! ▪Ashleigh Lamming

Pictured on p.11: Grand Final of the ESU London Debate Challenge 2012.Above left: ESU Primary London Debate Challenge Final at the Tower of London.Above: Getting your point across.

Theme: Debate


“This House believes that debating is the best mechanism for teaching Citizenship”

about our society and the wider world, and then support them in exploring different opinions, finally coming to their own decision.

Although debate does have its place in the Citizenship classroom, I do not believe that it is the best mechanism for explor-ing controversial issues, especially when used as a stand-alone technique. Contro-versial issues are by nature multi-faceted and complex. Formal debate often creates a false dualism, where the issue is artificially segregated into ‘for’ and ‘against’, overlook-ing the all-important grey area. Students are required to support one ‘side’ before having fully explored all the concepts involved.

Formal debate can also be more appro-priate for some learning styles and person-alities over others. Confident students may thrive in a public speaking situation, leaving shyer ones anxious and withdrawn. Small group work and presentation can draw on the abilities of many types of learner, with-out creating the potentially hostile and con-frontational environment of a heated debate.

Andrew Fitch, in propositionIt is exactly because of shyer and more reserved students that it is so vital to use formal debate. The power games, the sly put downs, the anxiety of ‘what if no one agrees with me?’; these are what constrain shy students from getting involved in discussions about controversial issues. Formal debate shields them from many of these factors.

When given a specific, set speaking order, and length of speaking time, students are both constrained and liberated. Those who would otherwise dominate are, to an extent, constrained in their ability to influence discussion and to bring the politics of the playground into the classroom. Without specific procedures, they might well climb

Andrew Fitch, in proposition There is a whole gamut of tools available to the Citizenship teacher; tools which enable the teaching of the curriculum area’s subject matter, while also instilling in students its core values and processes.

Of this range of tools, I will argue that formal debating is far and away the best. The first reason that formal debate is the best medium for the Citizenship teacher relates to the teaching of controversial issues, such as racism, and abortion. These can present a real challenge for the Citizenship teacher; trying to negotiate between various deeply held beliefs, between the need to discuss them and the fear of upsetting or offending students.

By using debate in the teaching of controversial issues, the Citizenship teacher is able to create a comfortable atmosphere by allowing the students to distinguish between the role they are playing in the debate and their own deeply held, and often very sensitive beliefs.

Anna Liddle, in oppositionThere is no doubt that exploring controversial issues is vital in Citizenship. As Citizenship educators, it is our role to empower young people with information

In a formal debate, pupils are required to argue in favour of positions which they do not fully hold (or indeed, not hold at all). Andrew Fitch and Anna Liddle are both passionate advocates of a wide range of oral approaches to controversial issues, and have been placed by the editors in proposition and opposition of the strongly-worded motion above; form and content both demonstrate the exploratory power of a debate’s oppositional method.

Formal debate often creates a false dualism, where the issue is artificially segregated into ‘for’ and ‘against’, overlooking the all-important grey area


Anna Liddle summarises her arguments in oppositionIn summary, I feel that formal debate is not the best method. It may be widely-used and steeped in tradition, but I feel that it also has many problems. The method does little to foster empathy and increase understanding as too much of the focus is on winning. The idea of problem-solving, rather than competing, is overlooked.

Formal debate does have a role in the classroom, but only as part of a larger explo-ration of the issues at hand. A range of meth-ods using active and cooperative learning is more inclusive, less confrontational and permits a plurality of belief to be shown, al-lowing young people to understand a range of views. Students should not be afraid of the middle-ground.

As Citizenship educators, we must strive for a pedagogy that empowers students and creates critical thinkers in a supportive environment.

Andrew Fitch summarises his arguments in propositionThere are undoubtedly a huge range of tools available to the Citizenship teacher to engage students and to encourage them to participate in all manner of discussions. Of these tools, formal debate is the best!

Formal debate lays a foundation upon which other forms of discussion can build. The safe atmosphere that formal debate creates allows for grey to be bought into the discussion, with the black and white having been argued and rebutted, back and forth.

It is, in part, the very confrontational nature of formal debate that allows, ironi-cally, for a safe and encouraging atmosphere. The students are acting, they are performing, they are engaging in a game; they are not at risk of having their true opinions questioned anymore than their bank balance is threat-ened by Monopoly.

Intellectual activity takes place, students’ confidence grows, and all through what is ultimately a game! In conclusion, let me just say – all students do want a soapbox, some just don’t know how to get on it! ▪

on their own personal soapbox, often at the expense of quieter students. Consequently, it is the students who lack the confidence to risk ‘battle’ against their confident classmates who stand to gain the most. They can now have their allotted time, without interruption; they can voice opinions safe in the knowledge that they are not necessarily perceived as theirs, and that they will not be brought ‘to account’ for them later in the day. Formal debate gives every student a soapbox!

Anna Liddle, in oppositionOften students do not want a soapbox! Standing up in front of the class to argue can be daunting for many, especially those with self-confidence issues.

All students can benefit from small group work, which better supports shyer learners and allows students to evaluate each other’s ideas and draw on each other’s skills cooperatively. This doesn’t mean a bit of friendly competition is off-limits. At CND Peace Education we developed ‘The Bomb Factor’ format, where in small groups students put across a variety of views creatively, in the style of the X-Factor! This not only introduces a plurality of arguments, but allows students to employ what best suits their learning styles, be it a poster (perfect for the less confident) or a song/rap! Light-hearted methods such as these can defuse a potentially highly-charged debate making the discussion less confrontational.

It is important for students to advocate views not necessarily their own, but only if they have a chance to eventually reach their own conclusions.

Other methods also work well, such as a debating continuum. One side of the room is the “strongly agree” point, the opposite is “strongly disagree”. Students situate themselves along a line between the two depending on their opinion. All can participate in this especially visual and kinaesthetic way of exploring the “grey area” with no passive spectators on the sidelines. This method allows a certain amount of freedom to explore issues that are raised, whereas the formal style of debating could be seen as too structured.

When given a specific, set speaking order, and length of speaking time, students are both constrained and liberated

In Proposition: Andrew Fitch is an experienced international competitive debater, former education officer at the English-Speaking Union and a Citizenship teacher.In Opposition: Anna Liddle is Peace Education Officer at the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, email her at: [email protected].

Pictured left: Primary school debater (ESU).


Tensions were high when they came together... but we couldn’t do so without debating the most important issue that affects all their lives

Theme: Debate

Debating in a conflict zone

Can methods used in the classroom make a difference in real-world conflict resolution? And how can working with young people in global conflict zones inform Citizenship teachers about their everyday practice in schools? Andrew McCallum talks to Debate Mate’s Jess Dix about her work with youth leaders in Palestine and Israel.

Jess Dix is Education Development Director for Debate Mate, a charitable organisation that trains university students to run after-school debate clubs in schools located in socially disadvantaged areas across the UK. She recently visited Palestine and Israel with colleagues as part of a project to train youth leaders how to use debate with young people from both sides of their particular conflict. She believes the work carried out has the po-tential to make some difference to how the territorial dispute is viewed on a local level and that lessons learned there throw light on some of the uses to which debating can be put by Citizenship teachers in UK schools.

Jess is clear that her team were work-ing with youth leaders with a very specific view of a potential solution to their conflict. Belonging to a grassroots organisation called One Voice, which has offices in several cities around the world, they believe in and pro-mote a two-state solution that sees the 1967 Palestine-Israel borders as offering the basis for an independent, viable Palestinian state. They reject violence as a means to resolving conflict and seek an end to occupation of the Palestinian territories. However, even with clearly shared aims such as these, Jess points out “that a resolution clearly means different things to both sides.” Debate Mate’s role was, then, twofold. On the one hand, it was to dis-seminate its own methods and philosophy

in using debate with young people not only as a medium for exploring controversial top-ics, but also as a means for developing key communication, higher-order thinking and interpersonal skills; on the other hand, it was to provide One Voice youth leaders from both Palestine and Israel with the opportu-nity to debate their own versions of what a two-state solution to their conflict might mean in practice.

The Debate Mate team went first to Ra-mallah, in the central West Bank, where they worked with over 40 Palestinian youth lead-ers. They then travelled to Tel Aviv to work with a similar number of Israelis. Finally, both groups came together in Jerusalem to debate the motion: “This House believes that a one-state solution is the only permanent solution”. Jess admits that in spite of being relatively well-informed about the conflict, she was not prepared for what she saw in Ramallah. “There was far more poverty than I was expecting,” she says, “and the Palestin-ian people live under incredible restrictions.” Her sense of shock was compounded when confronted with entirely different conditions only a few miles away in Israel. “We were suddenly in a very modern, Westernised world,” she says, “with youth leaders who generally had much more experience of for-mal education.” This meant that it was some-times easier to transmit the principles of Debate Mate to the Israeli participants, some of whom had previously experienced formal debating. The contrast in living conditions, combined with the limited opportunities for Palestinians and Israelis to come together, even within an organisation like One Voice, led to some anxiety before both groups met in Jerusalem. “Tensions were high when they came together,” Jess comments. The Debate Mate team thought carefully about what ultimately should be debated and concluded, Jess says, that “we couldn’t bring them to-


As well as developing their linguistic and cognitive skills, students also experience the value of self-restraint, moderation and listening to others

gether without debating the most important issue that affects all their lives. However, we had to take great care about how to get to that point.” To this end, the team helped ease tensions by drawing on strategies used when working with schools. Games were played before the debate proper and then both sides were split up into mixed Palestinian-Israeli teams. Participants from both groups were also trained to offer Points of Information. Consequently, everyone involved was forced to engage with opinions other than their own, either in having to argue for a one-state solution, contrary to their own beliefs, or in having to take on board points about a two-state solution from a different perspec-tive to their own. They were also placed in the interesting position of being in a team putting forward an argument which was not held by a single person involved – namely that a one-state solution is the only viable solution – but which might win under the rules of formal debating (as it happens, the motion was defeated).

Participants deemed the event a success. A Palestinian youth leader commented that members now felt “more comfortable to participate in public debates.” Another said he now felt more able to “make people really believe in my cause.” Such conclusions are useful to consider when bringing debating back to some of the more mundane, though still pressing, issues with which young people contend in the UK. Jess is adamant that Debate Mate is not about giving a few high-achieving students the rhetorical skills often associated with academic success, but

about providing students of all abilities with structures within which to think and put forward opinions. Consequently, she believes the strategies used in the Middle East are equally applicable to Citizenship teachers using debate at home. Without structure, she believes that classroom discussions around controversial topics are sometimes difficult to control, with limited opportu-nity for students to acknowledge and take on alternative viewpoints. Under the terms of formal debate “opinions can be heard without dissolving into arguments.” As well as developing their linguistic and cognitive skills, students also experience the value of self-restraint, moderation and listening to others. She recommends building up to dif-ficult debate topics in much the same way as demonstrated in Jerusalem, by first engaging students in fun topics where little is at stake in the final outcome before confronting big issues. She concludes that “the Debate Mate programme in Israel / Palestine essentially helped the young people to become better citizens through fully understanding each other’s point of view; this is an important part of Citizenship teaching, and debate is the perfect platform to allow this to happen.”

A short film of the Debate Mate – One Voice collaboration can be viewed at http://youtu.be/OZKKqqv5pLk.

Debate Mate run teacher training as well as their core after school debate pro-grammes. For more information see their website: www.debatemate.com or telephone 020 7922 8008. ▪

Pictured left: a street scene in Ramallah.Below: One Voice Palestine and the Debate Mate team.

Andrew McCallum is Senior Lecturer in Education at London Metropolitan University. He is author of The Complete Citizenship Resource File, published by Routledge.


Cultural differences and debating

have now done debate training in over 38 countries around the world. While not an expert in speech culture or intercultural communication, I do have a rea-sonable amount of experience to bring to the subject in making several observations.

Making generalizations here can be a risky business. I have always found the broad applica-tion of stereotypes to be trouble-

some and counterproductive. No member of a major group fits the stereotypes that may be applied to that group. With that in mind, I would like to note that these generaliza-tions do not apply to all people in that group and may not be overwhelmingly accurate. Rather, I will try to speak of debating ‘ten-dencies’ and ‘concerns’ that I have seen in my travels.

At the third ‘Thinking and Speaking a Better World’ Conference held in Maribor, Slovenia in October 2010 I led a fascinating panel discussion on this issue with Abdul Gabbar Al-Sharafi from Yemen, Abdel Latif Sellami from Morocco, Maja Nenadovic from Hungary and the Netherlands, Debbie New-man of the United Kingdom, David Cratis Williams of the USA and Masako Suzuki Takahashi from Japan. I have shamelessly borrowed some ideas from this discussion, which can be seen at: http://debatevideoblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/panel-cultural-varia-tion-debate-and.html.

Speech cultureDifferent societies have a different speech

culture. Before teaching debating in Fin-land I heard that they have a Finnish speech culture, especially the region I was going to (Tampere). I read about the old saying, “a few words can cause a lot of trouble.” I did find this reflected in some of my interactions, but the training was very productive. The follow-ing observations may be a reflection of spe-cific dimensions of various speech cultures.

Politeness normsPoliteness is more ritualized and more important in some societies. They can have complete procedures for showing gratitude, but also specific ways in which to phrase dis-agreements. At times there are signals that are lacking to show constructive disagree-ment. I was once told that decades ago when Japan started debating it was decided to do so in English because the Japanese polite-ness conventions made debating difficult at times. Obviously, Japan has overcome these barriers, but nevertheless it makes sense to me that in some societies attacking the ideas of a guest or outsider might be construed as extremely impolite. For this reason people may either decide not to become involved in debate or else hold back during the event itself. Audiences may also feel uncomfort-able watching, and those from other cultures perceived as misbehaving.

Disagreement and personal dislikeThis is an issue in many cultures and in many situations. When one person disagrees with another, at times there is an inference of personal dislike not just different opin-ions about an issue. An example occurred in Korea when I was there in 2000. The prime minister asked me to run a workshop with his office staff because they were always trying to determine what his opinion was and then echo it, while what he wanted was many different ideas so that he could

To what extent are the conventions of debating influenced by cultural identity? Alfred C Snider presents a discussion of his experiences.

Politeness is more ritualized and more impor-tant in some societies. They can have com-plete procedures for showing gratitude, but also specific ways in which to phrase disagreements.

Theme: Debate


discover the best. They feared showing dis-agreement with his ideas. I tried hard to help his impressive staff understand, and I think I did, but it is hard to change the habits of a lifetime, both personal and professional.

We all have confronted this. Once you indicate disagreement smiles may fade and looks of consternation may begin. I am not sure that it is unique to any specific culture, but some experience this in heightened form, regardless of whether it is common to all humanity.

Gender issuesIt is not a unique issue that ‘men’ have a more privileged debating voice than ‘wom-en.’ Among the Mapuche people of Chile, for example, women do most of the talking, which is why so many excellent high school debaters in Chile have been Mapuches. Yet, this is often an exception. Women and girls who choose to speak on serious issues are often interrupted and told what to think. This is common across the globe, but more pronounced in some societies. While teach-ing debate in Iraq I was confronted by several female students after the first debates and told it was one of the most empowering experiences of their lives. Previously when they spoke about serious issues an older male (usually a relative) would interrupt them and tell them what they should say and think, but in their practice debate the men had to listen and remain silent, before answering their arguments.

Sexism in debate is not new nor is it located in only some societies. It may be a more serious problem in some, but it is also a universal concern. For example, in the USA it is appropriate for men to get excited and speak forcefully about issues, but when women do so they are often branded as ‘hysterical’. I assume that even the Mapuches need to work on this, making room for more male voices.

Standards of ‘what is debatable’Different issues are in different categories of ‘debatability’ in different societies. It is usually a good idea to debate a topic that has reasonable grounds for argument on both sides, but this may be socially determined. For example, basic issues of gay rights are

not worth debating in UK circles any longer, but are still open for debate in places like the USA, while being beyond debate in other societies. The historical record may also play a part in determining what is debatable. In Japan I am told that a group of wealthy industrialists wanted to put up money for the national association to debate about the extent of Japanese war crimes during World War II and how they were severely exagger-ated, but the association refused because they did not want to honor this position with an equal place on the debating platform. My assumption is that different cultures and societies are ready to debate different issues at different times.

Authority standardsFinally, some cultures share different ideas of authority figures and sources. Debaters are advised to use facts, opinions and conclusions from others to support their argument. In some societies this is reflected by the use of religious scripture to support arguments (Northern Virginia and Northern Iraq have this in common). Of course, in reality quoting these documents only works if everyone accepts them as revealed truth, so I have had to explain to many that this assumes we all agree on everything, where the premise of the debate is that we do not, and they should seek means of support for an argument that would be accepted by the ‘other’. It is not just religious scripture, but also famed people of history, whether Thomas Jefferson in the USA or Mao Zedong in China. Debaters need to always think about what will work in the mind of the impartial audience, which is one of the greatest strengths of the whole activity.

ConclusionI have been lucky to be exposed to and become educated by the many debaters and teachers from many cultures that I have worked with. As a race, humans speak with many voices, and to me they are all welcomed into the debate. ▪

Alfred C Snider is Edwin Lawrence Professor of Forensics at the University of Vermont. His website includes a range of debate resources, see http://debate.uvm.edu.

While teaching debate in Iraq I was confronted by several female students after the first debates and they told me it was one of the most empowering experiences of their lives.

Pictured left: The London Debate Challenge run by the ESU.

The format in which formal debate is conducted can have a profound impact on what is said. Harold Raitt explains why, discussing parliamentary systems in London, Edinburgh and Berlin.

s discussed in the editorial, there are many different ways of holding a debate. The relatively recent use of formal debating as a means of core curriculum delivery devel-oped out of the UK’s strong tradi-tion of extra-curricular debate, itself modeled on university societies such as the Oxford Union (established in 1823) which was, in turn, directly inspired by the then two-party parliamentary system

and its oppositional politics between the Whigs and Tories.

A two-sided ‘Proposition v. Opposition’ format has therefore developed as standard. But, just as the House of Commons has adapted its seating arrangements to permit the inclusion of a major third party, educa-tional debate formats do not have to be limit-ed to a simple two-team affair. The standard format for university debate competitions in the UK is known as the ‘British Parliamen-tary’ (BP) format and consists of a total of four teams, two on each side. Chiming well with the current situation at Westminster, both sides can be seen as a form of uneasy coalition; in the case of BP, the second team on each side is not allowed to contradict its predecessor, but as competitive BP debates rank teams in order from 1 to 4, they are required to outdo them by presenting ‘extensions’ to their side’s case which show them to be the better team.

BP debates are invariably presented with both teams facing off against each other down the two sides of a long table; but while

Theme: Debate


Parliamentary debate in different countries

Westminster may often be called the ‘mother of all parliaments’, the majority of modern parliaments since the French revolution have adopted a semi-circular format for debate. This is not necessarily correlated with the number of parties in a given pol-ity: Canada (which is one of a number of Commonwealth countries which retains a Westminster-style layout) has had signifi-cant third and fourth parties over the past century. The USA is dominated by Demo-crats and Republicans, but has semi-circular layouts in both the Senate and House of Representatives (although, of course, the Founding Fathers tried to establish the USA as a non-party-political system).

However, a semi-circular debating ar-rangement is particularly suited to multi-party politics. When populated by the parties’ representatives, it acts like an ever-present pie chart, reminding members and observers of who holds the largest mandate to govern and, in countries where coalitions are a standard outcome of elections, which parties are having to work together to create a majority.

Germany’s long tradition of multi-party politics is, perhaps, responsible for its uni-versity debaters developing a format called Offene Parlamentarische Debatte (Open Parlia-mentary Debate). In this format, formal set speech lengths are also allocated to Freie Red-ner (free speakers) who can choose to agree with either the Proposition or Opposition, or to present a third point of view.

Given the often unruly conduct of debates in the House of Commons, one might wonder whether the spatial stand-off between the Government and Opposition benches has an effect on behaviour. Evi-dence to the contrary can be found on You-Tube; type in ‘Fight in Parliament’ and you’ll come across lots of amusing videos of brawls in Russia or Pakistan that go way beyond

Just as the House of Commons has adapted its seating arrangements to permit the inclusion of a major third party, educational debate formats do not have to be limited to a simple two-team affair

Phot

o: ©

And

rew

Cow

an /

Scot

tish

Parli

amen

t


the antics of even Westminster’s notorious Mace-wielder Dennis Skinner.

But there is a definite message – “we’re working against you” – that is sent out by the Westminster layout. And, in general, there is an implicit feeling of “we’re working togeth-er towards a common goal” in semi-circular formats, particularly when a non-party-polit-ical symbol (such as the flag in the US Senate or the Mace in the Scottish Parliament) is placed at the semi-circle’s focal point.

Indeed, it was a desire to get away from the atmosphere of Westminster that led to many of the decisions behind both the architecture and the parliamentary proce-dure of the devolved Scottish Parliament at Holyrood in Edinburgh. Not all of these goals have been realised. As the late Campbell Christie, a key figure in securing devolution north of the border, said in an interview with www.holyrood.com last year, “I was on the Constitutional Steering Group set up to work on the arrangements for the new Parliament and I argued for quite a while that we should not have First Minister’s Questions and while yes, the First Minister should report to Parliament, perhaps through committees, it just demeans politics to have that yah-boo politics that simply replicates Westminster and is only of interest because they are doing battle and I just feel hugely disappointed that our committee structure, which is much better than that at Westminster, is just not having the influence we envisaged.”

Parliamentary procedures are numer-ous and complex, so for the following three lesson scheme of work I have chosen to focus mainly on the two areas mentioned by Chris-tie in his quote; firstly, the weekly opportu-nity for parliamentarians to ask questions of government figureheads and, secondly, the oft-overlooked area of committees. As well as being two areas of great importance, the committee system is an area where some of the non-combative techniques discussed by Anna Liddle earlier in this edition can come into play.

Prime Minister’s Questions in the Com-mons is a media circus with audiences around the world (particularly in the United States) even exceeding those in the UK. Point-scoring by opposition parties alter-nates with rhetorical questions from the

government’s side which can be roughly paraphrased as asking “does the Prime Minister agree that both he and our party are absolutely brilliant?” Soundbites prevail, as today’s media is reluctant to broadcast any exchange longer than about ten seconds. In Holyrood, First Minister’s Questions open with a set of exchanges between the First Minister and Opposition Leader which tend to be more focused on digging deeper into a single issue; however, half the session often elapses before more junior MSPs get to have their say. In the German Bundestag’s Befra-gung der Bundesregierung (Questions to the Federal Government), Chancellor Merkel is not normally even in attendance. Proceed-ings are opened by a five minute speech on a chosen issue by one of the cabinet Ministers, underlining the Ressortprinzip (Principle of Individual Ministerial Responsibility) and of the Kollegialprinzip (Collegiality) which are firmly embedded in Germany’s writ-ten constitution. Later each Wednesday afternoon, a further Fragestunde (Question Time) takes place, where oral answers to pre-submitted questions are often answered by Staatssekretäre (Permanent Secretaries) rather than ministers.

The suggested lessons borrow concepts piecemeal from these different set-ups; seat-ing layout, speaker order, time limits, defer-ring to experts and prepared v. unprepared answers are some of the differences acted out in the second lesson. Of course, this brief investigation does not look at several hugely important procedural systems within a par-liament. The interplay of different chamber debates and committee systems in the draft-ing and redrafting of detailed legislation de-mands serious attention; A-level students in particular should be encouraged to compare footage available on www.parliamentlive.tv of the difference between debates on a specific bill passing through the House of Commons and the House of Lords, and pos-sibly to develop a further full-scale role play of these activities.

I hope this dramatic approach to active learning proves to be a stimulating experi-ence for you and your students; let me know about your discoveries, including some of the best ‘suggested formats’ from lesson three, at [email protected]. ▪

Given the often unruly conduct of debates in the House of Commons, one might wonder whether the spatial stand-off between the Government and Opposition benches has an effect on behaviour

Harold Raitt has worked in education departments at the English-Speaking Union and National Theatre and is now Director of Johannes Factotum & Friends, a group of inter-disciplinary arts, media and education experts: www.johannesfactotum.com.

Do the semi-circular formats of the Scottish Parliament (pictured bottom left) and the German Bundestag (pictured below) have an impact on the conduct of political debates?

Phot

o: ©

Deu

tsch

er B

unde

stag

/ M

arc-

Stef

fen

Unge

r


Theme: Debate / Lesson Plan

Parliamentary debates in London, Edinburgh and BerlinA medium term plan about the relationship between style and substance

This scheme of work is dependent on sets of skills developed through embedding a formal debate model (like the one described in the over-view on pages 8 and 9) in regular classroom practice. It builds on these basic skills to enable stu-dents to think about the ways in which debate can be used.

Main learning objectives for Scheme of Work:• Comparing the way parliamen-tarians hold ministers to account in Westminster, Holyrood and the Bundestag (1.1a, d)• Take part in formal debates modeled on real-world parliaments (2.2a, b, c)• Evaluate the best methods for fair parliamentary conduct (1.1b) and create ways to make parliaments better (2.3a).

Lesson 1

Resources:• Whiteboard, speakers and good internet connection for streaming video. Preload the following pages in separate windows or tabs (instructions correct at the time of going to print):• See www.parliamentlive.tv and click ‘What’s On’. Using the date op-tions, find the most recent Wednes-day for which ‘Oral Questions to the Prime Minister’ is listed at 12pm. Click the link to load the page.• Go to www.scottish.parliament.uk and click on ‘Parliament TV’ under

the ‘News & Media Centre’ menu option. Select ‘First Minister’s Ques-tions’ from the links on the right-hand side of the page, and choose the most recent installment.• Load http://dbtg.tv/fvid/1581508.• A set of between three and six top-ics. These should be put in motion forms starting “That this House ...” (Westminster form), “That the Parlia-ment ...” (Scottish form) or “The Ger-man Bundestag ...” so that they can be supported by the Government and opposed by the Opposition.

Important note on class size: The active learning part of the Scheme of Work only works with a class size of 20-30 (ideally more), so consider combining smaller classes for Lesson 2.

StarterTalk about what has been in the news this week. If you were a Member of Parliament, what questions would you want to ask the Prime Minister about recent events?

Introduction• Watch the first five or six minutes of Prime Minister’s Question Time from Westminster. Wait until you have heard from several MPs on both sides, including the Leader of the Opposition.• Individually, students should write down their impressions of the debate.• Watch the first five or six minutes of First Minister’s Question Time from Holyrood. Wait until you have heard two or three exchanges be-tween the First Minister and the Op-

position Leader; they tend to domi-nate the first part of proceedings, so you may not hear from anyone else.• Individually, students should write down their impressions of the debate.• Working in groups and as a class, get students to compare and contrast the Question Times. How is the lay-out different? What order do people speak in, for how long, and in how much detail? Are the MPs and MSPs behaving themselves? What is the role of the Speaker (in Westminster) and the Presiding Officer (in Holyrood)?

DevelopmentDivide the class into the four groups and subgroups below. Distribute the lists of motions that you allocated to the groups before the lesson. Note the opportunities for differen-tiation. To keep things simple you may want to stick to using the first two groups first, just to draw out the contrast between these two parliamentary styles.

Students should use this section of the lesson to first brainstorm ideas and then arrange them into groups with similar themes.


Questions marked with a * should be written down and handed to the teacher, who will collate and pass them on to the Government Minister at the end of the lesson so they can then prepare responses. Tasks and research should be finished off for homework.

PlenaryWatch the final video clip from the German Bundestag. Listen to the chairman introduce the Cabinet Minister before skipping to about 7 minutes into the clip. Students who speak some German can listen out for the chair mentioning the Bund-estag’s new traffic light and clock-based system for timing speeches (rot = red, gelb = yellow, grün = green, rücklaufende Uhr = countdown clock). There is then a very well-mannered first question from an Abgeordnete (MP). Discuss how this clip differs from Westminster PMQs and Scot-tish FMQs. Which is more interest-

ing to watch? Which makes for more effective government? Why?

Lesson 2

Note – you may need to extend the activity if short periods, classroom management issues or particularly able and talkative students require it.

Location & Resources: School Hall or Gym – with chairs, tables and benches arranged as in diagram below.

StarterAll students to briefly revise their questions (and, where appropriate, group Government or Opposition policies) from previous lesson.

Section 1 (with teacher as Speaker)Run activity in Westminster set-up, including following characteristics:

• Questions / responses to be short, but no set time limits.• One speaker from each side to be called before Leader of the Opposi-tion is called.• Leader of Opposition’s contribu-tions not to be entirely consecutive.• Pre-appoint responsible ‘rabble-rousers’ on each side to cheer, laugh and boo. Clapping, however, is not permitted. Announce to all students that this behaviour is acceptable in this part of the lesson, but only within limits, which you can rein-force as Speaker using the familiar phrase “Order! Order!”

Section 2 (chaired by teacher)Take 2-3 minute to calm all students down (a meditative exercise with eyes closed may be useful here; ask a drama teacher for suggestions!). Run activity in Holyrood / Bundestag set-up. Suggestions for a hybrid ‘non-Westminster’ format include:• Initial statement (for duration

Group 1:Westminster

Group 2: Holyrood / Bundestag

Groups 3 and 4:Committees A and B

Prime Minister: Prepare for questions on all topics (Level: Hard)

Cabinet Minister: Prepare a statement (you can specify the duration) on any of the given topics. (Level: Hard)

Committee chair: Lead preparation of one topic (the two committees can use the same topic, or different ones), and make notes on opinions of all commit-tee members (Level: Hard)Government backbenchers: Prepare a

‘helpful’ question for the Prime Minister on one topic each (Level: Easy)

Government supporters: Prepare a ‘helpful’ question for the Government Minister, possibly on the Minister’s chosen topic.* (Level: Easy)

Committee members: Prepare ques-tions or short statements (for, against or neutral) relating to the topic. (Level: Easy)

Opposition Leader: Prepare three ques-tions against the Prime Minister, either on the same topic or different topics (Level: Medium)

Opposition Leader: Prepare three questions for the Government Minister, as least one of which should be on the Minister’s chosen topic* (Level: Medium)

Experts: Listen to the preparation of the topic and select a particular area to go away and research in detail for homework (Level: Harder)

Opposition backbenchers: Prepare a question each against the Prime Minister, on any of the given topics (Level: Easy)

Non-Government Members: Prepare a question each either for or against the Government Minister (non-Government members are not necessarily all from the same party). One or two of these should be on the Government Minis-ter’s chosen topic.* (Level: Easy)

Theme: Debate / Lesson Plan


agreed last lesson) from Cabinet Minister.

• Initial set of consecutive questions from Opposition Leader, followed by more junior members.• Time limits to be enforced with audible or visual signals.• Only pre-notified questions as writ-ten down in last lesson may be used.• Polite clapping may be allowed. Absolutely no booing, cheering or laughing.

Section 3 (chaired by students)Run committee sessions, with the following rules:• Chairs to call on participants who, based on their work together in the last session, will be most helpful at any given moment.• Collaboration and mutual help is the most important part of the

exercise.• ‘Experts’ to be called upon and ac-corded particular respect as ‘visitors’.

PlenaryDiscuss differences between differ-ent exercises.

Lesson 3

Revise differences from last lesson and ask students to work in groups and individually to devise their own set of ideal parliamentary procedures.

Lesson 4 (optional)

Work with your school’s Media Studies department to film Lesson 2. Media Studies students should

then edit sections of the footage as it might appear on:• The evening’s main news broadcast (soundbites only, with links from a presenter).• A dedicated political programme (longer excerpts).• On-demand footage on the internet as used in Lesson 1.Invite the Media Studies students to the lesson to show their footage and explain their editing decisions. Ask students from your class to compare the footage with their memories of the real event. Then hold a joint discussion on the implications of this for democracy and increasing / diminishing public understanding of the political process. ▪

gym benches: aim to have insufficientseating for all class members!

exam desks and chairs, one per student

despatch boxes

Theme: Debate

Useful debating links

www.debateacademy.netContains information on great residential courses run by Alfred C Snider (see earlier article) in Vermont, USA and by Bojana Skrt in Slovenia.

www.debatemate.comDebate Mate works with children in the country’s most challenging inner-city schools and uses debaters from top universities to run after-school debate clubs. Their website contains details of how to apply for this programme, as well as information on their teacher training opportunities, which are open to all schools.

www.debatingmatters.comDebating Matters is a national debating competition for sixth form students. A key difference in format is the active involvement in each debate of members of the panel of judges from various professional fields.

www.esu.orgThe English-Speaking Union runs a range of educa-tional programmes. Among them are the ESU Schools Mace (the national debating championship), Discover Your Voice (a debate training programme) and Debate Academy (which is a residential course run each sum-mer). The ESU is also responsible for selecting and training the England World Schools Debating Team.

www.idebate.orgThe home of IDEA, the International Debate Education Association, includes access to many resources, including the legendary Debatabase and Debatepedia which have ‘Pros’ and ‘Cons’ for thousands of motions.

www.intelligencesquared.comOrganisers of great public debates with big-name speakers.

www.noisyclassroom.comVideos, training ideas, lesson plans and resources for using debate in the classroom, run by Debbie Newman (who contributed an article to this edition).

www.bristoldebating.comwww.dus.org.uk (Durham Union)www.cus.org (Cambridge Union)www.lsedebate.org www.oxford-union.orgA handful of the many UK universities running schools competitions in British Parliamentary style. Search online for ‘ICYD’ for details of which UK university will be running the next International Competition for Young Debaters, suitable for KS3 students.


ESU Debate Academy

Feature


In the third installment of her diary, Tricia Manktelow puts her school’s new debating society to the test in front of a live audience.

he Christmas holidays quickly became a distant memory as we planned for the demonstration debate. The girls had chosen the motion ‘the media is a bad influence on young people today.’ S had bravely agreed to take the opposing viewpoint and convinced K and N to work with

her. They spent two sessions getting together their thoughts and ideas remembering to find evidence to support their points. They encouraged each other to practice and emphasised the need for good body language that they had learnt. The group felt they were ready to show the school what they could do.

The date, time and place were arranged. Posters were distributed to all classes and invitations were specifically issued to teachers and the senior management. I had asked the drama teacher to record their performance so we could evaluate afterwards. Everything was ready. Or so I thought!

The girls arrived as I was organising the desks and chairs. They were ready. But where was Mr M and his camera? He had forgotten. And his camera didn’t have any charge – try the Dance department. More time spent seeking and cajoling.

girls had returned for more – and this time they hadn’t been chased in by Mrs K! They paired up with the ‘old cohort’ and we taught some of the skills. The next stage was to determine a topic and prepare for our next debate. They were adamant that they wanted to debate the price of school lunches, which proved too boring to sustain their interest. If nothing else this had taught them that choice of topic is important too. Having at last galvanised the growth of the group I was loathe to pursue this topic anymore and so we awaited a new motion.

In my enthusiasm I volunteered the group for a demonstration debate at ACT conference. When I told the students about my plan, they were excited and so our new motion will be based around the idea of student rights and responsibilities. I hope some readers will join us at the conference to see what we have achieved in our first year. ▪

And then where was our audience? The girls had exhorted their friends to come but only three had turned up. And where were the teachers who had promised so faithfully? I felt as let down as the girls that all our hard work wouldn’t be showcased.

We decided to go ahead regardless – maybe we could show our video in assemblies to demonstrate what the uninitiated had missed? I was just about to introduce the debate when eight girls arrived, ushered in by Mrs K. They were normally to be found just hanging around and were renowned for being loud and slightly unruly – but it was better than nothing. And so we began.

The proposers began with T, unfortunately she lost her nerve 30 seconds in and began to giggle and walked away from the table. J was brilliant. She stepped into the breach and presented several valid and supported arguments. She would have gone on but time was up and S took to the floor. She spoke eloquently and with passion – and considering that this was against her natural inclination I was very proud of her.

A short question session followed, and several of the audience made some valid points and then the vote. It was no surprise that the motion was passed but only narrowly and S is to be congratulated on her effort – she has definitely understood the ethos of debating.

The following week I was rather surprised to see about 20 students waiting to start the meeting. The

Diary of a debate debutantepart three

Tricia Manktelow is a Citizenship teacher at Dartford Technology College and an ACT Council member. Email: [email protected].

Pict

ured

bel

ow: A

you

ng d

ebat

er fr

om B

lack

fen

Scho

ol fo

r Girl

s. P

hoto

by

Pete

Pat

tisso

n.

Lorellie’s integrated assessment system could be very useful when assessing Citizen-ship through cross-curricular provision. However, there are some issues with the approach which is focused around a sum-mative assessment task leading to ‘back end’ assessment; it also risks over-complicating assessment using frameworks such as APP Speaking and Listening that may disappear with the new National Curriculum. In this article we aim to:• draw attention to the National Curriculum Standards Files for Citizenship that help plan better teaching, learning and assessment; • revisit the requirements for assessing Citizenship and using level descriptions;• highlight some key principles in assessing Citizenship effectively.

We offer an approach that makes assess-ing the subject simpler by integrating it into everyday teaching and learning, but which requires careful medium-term planning.

Citizenship ‘Standards Files’Our experience of developing the QCDA Citizenship Exemplification of Standards Files, shows it is possible to assess learning in Citizenship by integrating it into everyday teaching. The Standards Files:• show teachers that different kinds of evi-dence or work generated by students is valid when making assessments;• show collections of students work can be used to make holistic judgements; and• support consistency in teacher assessment by referencing the collections of students’ work to the national standards.

The materials are available at the ‘Teachfind’ website: http://bit.ly/HTJV2y.

Each Standards File includes a selection of a student’s work over a longer period of time to demonstrate their performance, and a teacher commentary on what they believe this shows about the student’s attainment. We captured students work in many forms – essays, oral discussion, presentations, model making, flow diagrams and preparatory notes – to encourage teachers to look at the full range of what students generate when assessing their performance, not just the outcome of a lesson or final piece of work in a project. The Standards Files are a practical representation of the subject standards and a benchmark to help with consistency in teacher assessment. They equate with hold-ing exemplar files of work in a school to il-lustrate performance at different standards.

Assessing Citizenship – revisiting the requirementsAssessment can be seen as the bridge be-tween teaching and learning. Students make good progress when given regular and high quality feedback by teachers to help them know how to improve. Effective judgements about attainment require teachers to draw on a wide range of evidence. The specific requirements regarding teacher assessment and reporting to parents for Citizenship are:1. Teachers must assess each student’s per-formance at the end of key stage 3, against the level descriptions and keep a record of their judgement.2. Schools must provide an annual report to parents on a student’s attainment in Citizen-ship for pupils in years 7 to 11.

Level descriptionsThe level descriptions for Citizenship help to establish clear national standards for the subject and provide a tool for teachers when planning progression. They help identify the qualities of student performance (or

Marcus Bhargava and Liz Moorse respond to Lorellie Canning’s article on assessment in Teaching Citizenship 32.

Feature


Assessing Citizenship is easier when you’ve planned for it

Marcus Bhargava is Course Leader for Citizenship PGCE at London Metropolitan University. Liz Moorse was Subject Adviser for Citizenship at QCDA, now a consultant in Citizenship education.

We offer an approach that makes assessing the subject simpler by integrating it into everyday teaching and learning, but which requires careful medium-term planning.

FeatureAssessing Citizenship... / Marcus Bhargava & Liz Moorse


pitch) at different levels of attainment. Most students should reach level 5 or 6

by the end of key stage 3.Contrary to their use in many schools,

level descriptions are designed to make ho-listic judgements of students overall perfor-mance at the end of the key stage. They are not for marking an individual piece of work, or a list of things students should do.

In ‘Citizenship Established?’ (2010), Ofsted provided some helpful information about good assessment practice. The most effective assessment was found in schools where assessment was well planned and understood by all staff involved; and teach-ers had considered and understood the standards of knowledge, understanding and skills required by the National Curriculum. Typically these schools had good quality marking and record keeping; used a range of modes of assessment; made effective use of evidence of student progress and attain-ment; and provided thorough annual Citi-zenship subject reports to parents.

Aligning assessment with sequence of learning outcomesAssessment can never be the end point of everything else you do in the teaching and learning cycle. It must be built into medium-term plans for sequences of lessons and should start with the codification of dif-ferentiated learning outcomes in terms of concepts and processes for your sequence. This will have several positive impacts on your teaching. First, you are more likely to align individual lesson outcomes and learning activities with your overall sequence outcomes. This will help you focus on the types of learning activities used in individual lessons and across the sequence and to establish a wider evidence base for making accurate assessment judgements. Second, learning becomes more coherent for students. Students are clearer about the relevance and the direc-tion of travel, and playing a fuller role in assessing and target setting. Third, assess-ment becomes more meaningful and simpler to engage with. You are clearer about what you are looking for and can intervene in simple ways to check understanding or aid progres-sion as you teach.

The first step involves mapping where

you expect different elements of the key con-cepts and processes to be developed across the key stage. In Citizenship we want to keep the content topical, but we still need to plan a coherent progression route. It makes sense to focus on one concept and one or two pro-cesses for each sequence of lessons you plan – an approach that the teachers took when developing the Standards Files. Content can then be selected to meet conceptual develop-ment and skills requirements, rather than the other way around.

Your second step should be to identify which elements of the key concept and processes you wish to see students develop during the sequence of learning. Write these out in terms of differentiated outcomes. You can use the level descriptions to help you, though you will need to add a little more ‘meat to the bones’. For instance, in a Year 8 sequence of lessons on democracy, you could look to the levels to help you define a mini-mum expected outcome in this concept. The Level 4 description includes the outcome ‘show[ing] understanding of democracy by making connections with their knowledge and experience of representation and taking action in the local community’. So you need to codify which aspects of democracy you expect them to show understanding of in relation to the topic and context. You could repeat this with the ‘process’, and then with Level 5 and Level 6 outcomes.

The final step is to stand back from the two or three outcomes you have outlined and consider how these could be realised across the four to six lessons in your sequence. Con-struct learning outcomes for your individual lessons that you know, taken together, will help to realise these sequence outcomes.

Using a wide evidence base drawn from everyday learningOnce you have aligned the sequence of learn-ing outcomes with your individual lessons, the next step is to choose a range of activi-ties for each lesson that will help students to meet these outcomes. The Standards Files show a range of different types of evidence that you can use, without needing to resort to end of unit assessment tasks. If your alignment is built into your planning, practi-cally anything you do will provide useful

Assessment can never be the end point of everything else you do in the teaching and learning cycle


assessment information and, allow you to give instant feedback to learners.. This kind of ‘rapid formative assessment’ (Leahy and William 2009) leads to substantial increases in learning and attainment, sometimes up to 70-80%. Teachers involved in the Citizen-ship Standards Files told us that they were more comfortable in making assessment judgements and giving on-going feedback. They knew what they were looking for and had made sure all the learning activities could give them and students a clear idea about how the students were progressing.

Involving students in assessmentExperts in assessment have highlighted the impact student involvement in the assess-ment process can have in boosting attain-ment, developing critical, independent and motivated learners and improving student confidence. Hattie (2011) highlights how self-assessment can help students under-stand and clarify new ideas and concepts and, in turn, apply these in different con-texts. The research suggests spending more time involving students in assessment at different stages of the learning cycle, when carefully planned, can be a more productive use of time than more traditional content-orientated teaching.

A powerful way of involving students in the assessment process is through fully involving them in establishing learning activity success criteria. Though many teach-ers share success criteria, research shows this is less effective than when students have helped create them. This is partly because when students are involved in creating them they are identifying important knowledge, understanding and skills that need to be demonstrated - an important cognitive chal-lenge. In Citizenship it also has the advan-tage of democratising the learning process.

There are some important provisos here. First, modelling is critical in this and Clarke (2008) suggests asking students to analyse a strong piece of work (real or created for purpose) helps them recognise quality and identify knowledge and skills that should be present in their own work. Second, all students should work to a common success criteria rather than differentiated criteria. Differentiated criteria have been shown to

complicate the assessment process and often limit outcomes for certain learners by setting the bar too low. A more effective approach is using targeted forms of differentiation to support learners in achieving the criteria. Third, Citizenship teachers in particular may need to be open minded about elements that students might include in the criteria. For in-stance, students may decide the use of social networking is a must when they are taking action. However, it is better to encourage students to construct more flexible criteria that allow them to show what they know and can do in different ways. This allows for cre-ativity while helping students and teachers to see if essential outcomes are being met.

The Standards Files include some important examples of how students were involved in peer and self-assessment and the establishment and development and use of success criteria. These include both simple and more formalised, developed approaches. They also include some examples where stu-dents were given more creative freedom and choice over how they met the criteria.

SummaryGetting assessment right is an on-going challenge for all teachers. However, research shows that students’ learning can be sig-nificantly improved through teachers being clear about what they are looking for, shar-ing these intentions with students, making sure that learning activities allow intentions to be realised and involving students in assessing these and identifying next steps. This requires careful planning when devel-oping sequences of learning, but the time taken at that point will undoubtedly pay off later in the teaching and learning cycle. ▪

Further readingBhargava, M (2010) ‘Assessing Citizenship’ in Gearon, L (ed.) Learning to Teach Citizenship in the Secondary School Abingdon: RoutledgeClarke, S (2008) Active Learning through Formative Assessment London: HodderHattie, J (2011) Visible Learning for Teachers Abingdon: RoutledgeLeahy, S and William, D (2009) Embedding assessment for learning: A professional develop-ment pack London: Specialist Schools and Academies Trust.

research shows that students’ learning can be significantly improved through teachers being clear about what they are looking for

Rob Pope reports that after a decade of exciting developments, citizenship education in post-16 education and training faces uncertainties as difficult as those confronting the subject at Key Stages 3 and 4. A turning point was reached with the closure in 2011 of the government funded Post-16 Citizenship Support Programme, a material and symbolic withdrawal of explicit policy support for Citizenship in the sector.

Ten years of development in post-16 CitizenshipAs with schools, there is a long history of cit-izenship education in the post-compulsory sector. However, our current conceptions of the subject and the new impetus to develop provision date from the second Crick Report (on Citizenship for 16-19 year olds) published in 2000 and the introduction of Citizenship to the national curriculum in 2002. Crick’s recommendations led to the Post-16 Citizen-ship Development Programme, established in 2001, with pilot projects to trial different approaches in all the post-16 settings. The Development Programme paved the way for a national support programme of staff train-ing, networking and curriculum resources development for post-16. Thousands of staff members from a wide variety of organisa-tions were to take part in support activities.

Work with the pilot projects from 2001 also contributed to consensus about what effective post-16 Citizenship learning should look like – with learner led, active approach-es very much to the fore – and strongly influenced the flexible guidance on post-16 Citizenship provided by QCA in 2004.

Post-16 Citizenship has aimed to build on earlier learning in school, with a particularly strong emphasis on learners’ active involve-

ment in their own communities. As practice evolved it became possible to identify six main approaches to Citizenship provision in increasing use, in varying combinations, by all types of further education provider:

Learner voice and representation 1 – The many ways of consulting young people and giving them a voice in decision-making can form a close alliance with Citizenship learning. They include: formal structures, (eg. youth councils, parliaments, advisory panels) specific activities (eg. focus groups, conferences, group discussions); and collect-ing feedback (eg. online surveys, suggestion boxes, video-diaries, chatrooms, blogs etc).

Citizenship qualifications – A range of Citizenship qualifications for post-16 learn-ers including: GCSE, AS and A Level Citizen-ship Studies; Citizenship qualifications at Level 1 and Entry Level; the Project qualifica-tion at Levels 1 and 2, and Extended Project at Level 3 (AS equivalent), which could be on a Citizenship theme.

Group tutorial and enrichment – School sixth forms and colleges typically offer group tutorial and enrichment pro-grammes which provide space within the curriculum to include Citizenship activities.

Voluntary and community action – Volunteering and community activities allow young people to gain experience of taking action on issues that are important to them. Charity fund-raising can make a contribution to Citizenship learning when young people learn more about the issues underpinning the need for funds. Local com-munity organisations often provide a focus for volunteering and citizenship action by young people.

Single events – Citizenship events, such as conferences, workshops and exhibitions, can bring a ‘buzz’ to an organisation. The best events are planned and run by young people based on topics of interest to them.

Feature


“Post-16 citizenship should give young people opportunities to: identify, investigate and think critically about citizenship issues, problems or events of concern to them, and decide on and take part in follow-up action where appropriate, and reflect on, recognise and review their citizenship learning.”Play your part: Post-16 Citizenship, QCA, 2004

A decade of progress under threatCitizenship in further education

Projects - These involve young people in undertaking projects on issues of interest to them. They often involve research but may have a range of outcomes in the form of music, art or video. These may or may not contribute to a qualification.

Policy context and funding cuts: threats to post-16 CitizenshipThe closure in 2011 of the government funded Post-16 Citizenship Support Pro-gramme represented a serious loss of free staff training, resources and policy direc-tion for Citizenship in further education. It is detrimental that, in national policy, there is no longer an explicit endorsement of the value of citizenship education in the post-compulsory sector to encourage and support those making decisions about the offer to students and the allocation of resources in colleges and other providers.

Further, to compound this difficult policy context, the impact of funding cuts is beginning to be felt in further education. Government announcements have made clear that over the next four years the sector will bear a proportionally higher level of spending cuts than any other within educa-tion, added to which some areas of reduction have particularly worrying implications for Citizenship provision.

One immediate example concerns the 75% cut (114 hours per learner reduced to 30) in ‘Entitlement’ funding, which all further education providers receive for each full-time learner, and covers areas includ-ing pastoral tutorial support and ‘extra-curricular’ enrichment activities. These are all important ‘spaces’ where many colleges and other providers have located Citizenship programmes and activities related to learner voice and representation.

Commenting on the cut to Entitlement funding, Eddie Playfair, Principal of Newham Sixth Form College maintains: “The massive cut to entitlement funding is a real threat to vital tutorial and enrichment work in colleg-es. We will be forced to consider the future of important programmes which promote the development of students’ skills and their wider contribution to the community.”

Another Principal, Ian Millard, of Wolverhampton College strikes a similar

note, commenting: ‘We believe our students need to be skills ready (through appropriate qualifications), work ready (through devel-oping the right attitude and approach to work) and citizen ready (to play their full part in their communities and the wider society. Our learning programmes are designed to support these three equally important priori-ties. The challenge we face going forward is how to maintain our priorities given pres-sures on loss of entitlement funding’. The hope is that such committed practitio-ners and providers will find new ways to continue supporting Citizenship activity as well as the wider enrichment curriculum. One option is likely to be the replacement of some non-accredited programmes and activities with long or short funded qualifi-cations with Citizenship content. Certainly many practitioners are keen to come together to consolidate progress made in the last ten years and think about the best ways forward, as reflected in interest in Active Citizens FE, a new national network for post-16 Citizenship.

Active Citizens FE With the closure of the Post-16 Citizenship Support Programme this new non-funded network has been set up to facilitate contin-ued collaboration between post-16 Citizen-ship practitioners and access to relevant news, resources and training. The Network aims to: • Promote excellence and innovation in learning for effective democratic participa-tion and social action• Campaign at all levels for the further devel-opment of post-16 citizenship education• Offer members a range of opportunities and services including: networking and sharing; learning resources; events; training; special projects; and a regular e-bulletin.

For further details of Active Citizens FE contact Rob Pope, Bernadette Joslin and Helen Wiles at [email protected] or see www.activecitizensfe.org.uk. ▪

1. For an exploration of the links between learner voice and post-16 citizenship see Rob Pope and Bernadette Joslin, Improving Quality, Developing Citizens: Learner Voice in Post-Compulsory Education and Training in Gerry Czerniawski and Warren Kidd, The Student Voice Hand-book: Bridging the Academic/Practitioner Divide, Emerald, Bingley, 2011.


Rob Pope is a founder of Active Citizens FE. Previously he worked on the LSIS Post-16 Citizenship Support Programme and has considerable experience as a teacher and manager in further education. He recently joined the ACT Council to represent the interests of the FE sector.

In national policy, there is no longer an explicit endorsement of the value of Citizenship education in the post-compulsory sector


Feature / International

Teaching for citizenship in multicultural democracies

Carole Hahn’s book Becoming Political made an important contribution to understanding citizenship education and highlighted the importance of comparative studies. In this article she shares some thoughts on a recent visit to Europe, during which she investigated some of the changes that have been happening in our increasingly diverse continent. Sharing some initial findings, she also invites us to consider how these observations connect with our own emerging practice.

oday citizenship educators across countries share similar challenges as the idea of ‘citizenship’ evolves to reflect new realities of globalization and increased diversity. For the past three years I have been conducting a comparative study of education for citizenship in England, Denmark, Germany, and the Netherlands to shed light on how citizenship educators in

different countries conceive of citizenship and citizenship education in schools with transnational students, ie. young people who are immigrants or whose parents are of immigrant backgrounds and whose daily lives cross national borders. For these young people, allegiances, life experiences, and understandings of citizenship extend beyond a single nation state. Although this is ‘research in progress’ and my ‘findings’ are still evolving, I thought that some of what I am learning from the three continental European countries might be of interest to readers of Teaching Citizenship.

For these young people, allegiances, life experiences, and under-standings of citizenship extend beyond a single nation state.

The Study I selected the countries because they share a democratic heritage and intertwined histories, yet their conceptions of citizen-ship and inclusiveness differ, as well as their approaches to citizenship education (Hahn, 1998). For example in Denmark schools have long been required to model democracy in order to teach democracy. In the Nether-lands, like England, traditionally citizenship education was not a high priority, but cur-rently schools are required to promote active citizenship and social integration.

For this article I am drawing on my observations and the teacher interview data collected from several schools in each country to illustrate the varied approaches to citizenship education in schools and the ways in which teachers’ perceptions reflect the national, as well as global discourse on citizenship in multicultural societies.

Varied Contexts, Practices & Perceptions — In DenmarkLarge cities such as Copenhagen, Odense, and Arhus received many newcomers over the last 20 years. As the numbers and vis-ibility of immigrants increased, so did the backlash against them. Right wing political parties that campaigned against immigrants grew in size and the media reported anti-immigrant incidents, most famously the political cartoon that depicted Allah as a terrorist and which spurred demonstrations in many countries.

With respect to citizenship education, the law governing gymnasia (which 50-60% of students attend) says that teaching shall contribute to developing students’ interest in and capacity for active participation in a democratic society. Most schools have active student councils that receive a budget from the municipality and they elect representa-tives to the school council (who serve along


with teacher and parent representatives). In my visits to Danish schools over the years, students have consistently confirmed that they regularly participate in decisions about what and how they study various subjects.

Samfundsfag, or social science, is a required subject for all students for at least one year in the gymnasium, ending with an oral exam. In addition, students may choose to take it for two or three years as one of the subjects for a written exam. Samfundsfag covers politics, economics, and sociology. In different schools I visited classes had studied the Danish political system, human rights, identity develop-ment, and the Danish welfare system.

One gymnasium, located in a large city, serves a population of students who are about 40% second-generation immi-grants with parents from throughout the Middle East, Africa, and south Asia. As part of a ‘global school’ network, a committee of teachers and students identified global topics for which they developed lessons. Additionally, at a full school meeting, teach-ers, staff, and students together decided to become a Fair Trade School serving Fair Trade products in the school café. The school has links with several international partner schools and they hosted students from many countries during the international Youth Climate Conference. I observed one class of students planning to work with a campaign called Blood in the Mobiles to create aware-ness of child labour in Congolese mines that produce minerals for mobile phones. Students at this school, like many students all over Denmark, participate in the an-nual Day of Work when students stay out of school to do jobs to raise money for the project of the year, such as one in Niger. One teacher from a diverse school explained, “Danish citizens, they are members of lo-cal communities, you form a group all the

time – for football, for good food etc. It is a Danish tradition since the 19th century – a nursing ground for democratic thinking.”

In The Netherlands When I studied citizenship education in the Netherlands in the 1990s, the country had an official policy of multiculturalism. People I met were proud of their country’s reputation for tolerance and welcoming newcomers. However, as in Denmark, much has changed as the numbers of immigrants continued to grow. Most of the migrants and their families live in the four largest cities and a corre-sponding ‘white flight’ has led to formerly ‘white schools’ becoming ‘black schools’. Although only 10% of the total population of the Netherlands is classified as having ‘immigrant backgrounds’, neighborhoods, as well as schools, in large urban areas are almost entirely made up of Turks, Moroc-cans, Surinamese, and Antilleans. The most recent immigrants tend to be family mem-bers of earlier migrant workers and refugees from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Somalia, but the numbers of refugees are still comparatively smaller (Hertweijer, 2009).

Dramatic events in the Netherlands in recent years include the murders of high profile critics of immigration and ‘Islamiza-tion’ and increased electoral success for anti-immigrant politicians. Today, many people speak of the failure of multicultural policies and since 2006 schools must promote active citizenship and social integration (burgersc-hap en sociale integratie). It is left to each pri-mary and lower secondary school to decide how it will incorporate the new subject into the school program. The subject maatschap-pijleer (study of society) is offered as an exam subject in upper secondary school. The themes for the exam in 2008 – 10 were: po-litical decision-making, mass media, and crime and society. And beginning this

Carole L Hahn is the Charles Howard Candler Professor of Educational Studies at Emory University in Atlanta USA. For 25 years she has been studying education for citizenship in the UK and the three European countries presented in this article.Email [email protected].

A committee of teachers and students identified global topics for which they devel-oped lessons. Additionally, at a full school meet-ing, teachers, staff, and students together decided to become a Fair Trade School.

Feature / InternationalTeaching citizenship in multicultural democracies / Carole Hahn


Dutch schools are now required to teach a historical canon that highlights 50 core events in a chronological history

year, 2011 - 12, students must complete a social apprenticeship (like community

service). Furthermore, Dutch schools are now required to teach a historical canon that highlights 50 core events in a chronological history. According to one observer, through these initiatives history education and citi-zenship education have been given higher priority than in the past (Doppen, 2008).

One school in my study delivers a pre-vocational programme and serves students whose families come from 40 countries. Although, secondary schools are supposed to have student councils (Bron, 2009), some schools, like this one, do not and this school had not yet implemented the new social apprenticeship policy when I was last there. One teacher at this school explained, “Citizenship is for me that you can live, get a job, know where to go and know something about politics, mass media… and know something about how society works… to be part of society”. This teacher said that when he taught the topic ‘multiculturalism’ in maatschappijleer, he used his own back-ground as an example. He told his students that his relatives were Indonesian, Moluc-can, and Surinamese. He also said he led a discussion about the practice of Muslim girls wearing a head covering, a topic raised in the students’ textbook. The teacher asked, “why should we as a school allow it or forbid it?” He noted that in Turkey, girls are not allowed to wear it, but in Morocco, it is encouraged. He asked the students to give arguments for and against it, referring to freedom of reli-gion and freedom of speech (which are guar-anteed by the Dutch Constitution). Another time when he had used students’ diverse backgrounds was when the class studied youth culture and subcultures. He gave students an assignment to interview a parent or grandparent about what youth subcul-ture was like when they were growing up.

At another school students visited a home for the elderly and the students took the elders, many in wheelchairs, for a ‘walk’ through a nearby park. The ex-perience was aimed at breaking down stereotypes between the white Dutch el-ders and the multicultural young people, as well as introducing the young to ideas of volunteerism in the community.

In GermanyA recent census in Germany revealed that 20% of the population had a migration back-ground (Luchtenberg, 2009), primarily con-centrated in a few large cities in the West. These figures include three large groups: 1) second and third generation descendants of guest workers who came to Germany in the 1960s, primarily from Turkey; 2) more than two million ‘resettlers’ – people of Ger-man ancestry who had been living in the So-viet Union and Eastern European countries prior to 1989; and 3) asylum seekers or refu-gees that crossed the borders into Germany after the Berlin Wall came down in 1989.

Most German states provide second-ary education in three types of schools – Hauptschulen (through year 9), Realschulen (through year 10), and Gymnasien (pre-university, was through year 13, but a recent reform is to finish at the end of year 12). In a few localities, there are integrated Gesa-mtschulen that contain all three tracks. Students from migration backgrounds, as compared to traditional German youth, are most likely to attend Hauptshulen and least likely to attend Gymnasien.

One school that serves many students ‘from migration backgrounds’ is quite unusual in being an integrated school that contains students from all three tracks. The lobby of the school is festooned with flags from all over the world and there is a ban-ner that reads, “Welcome to a European School.” The school is part of a network and has partner schools; students go on school trips and email students in partner schools. This school, like most German secondary schools, has a student council and be-cause it is a rare whole day school it offers extra-curricular activities in the afternoon, particularly related to arts and sports, which are two specialties of the school.

A social studies teacher at this school described ways in which students act as citizens in their school. In years 5 – 7, pu-pils have a weekly class meeting when they talk about issues in their class, such as classroom conflicts. Then as they get older, the students talk more about social and political issues. In one year 7 class students talked about the Haitian earthquake and the students decided to raise money for


Among the teachers I interviewed ... those who had experiences themselves crossing borders and living in multiple societies – as immigrants and children of immigrants – seemed to have the most awareness of their students’ trans-national life experiences

relief efforts. Older students plan class trips and elect representatives to the student council. The student council developed a new ‘school constitution’ and they organ-ised a protest against the state’s new rules to discourage integrated Gesamtschulen.

With respect to pedagogy, as in many German secondary schools I’ve visited over the years, social studies teachers often lead their students through a text – frequently photocopied materials that present differ-ent theoretical perspectives. The teacher’s questions seek comprehension and the teacher elaborates on student answers. It is also quite common to have Pro-Contra (for-against) discussions. A teacher at this school explained that citizenship, “is a mix of politics and civic duties… We have to open their perspective, so they ask, what can I do about this?” His class discussed: Should Turkey become a member of the EU? Should Georgia become a part of NATO?

This teacher also noted that although theirs is a European School that serves students from ‘migration backgrounds’, they do not have an explicit goal of focusing on either a global or multicultural perspec-tive. Rather these perspectives run through the curriculum and school activities. For example, when students were studying for the Abitur in their English classes they looked at multiculturalism in Dublin and when they studied the American South and South Africa, they discussed issues related to multiculturalism in those coun-tries. The teacher explained that in every class there are some students who fled, or their parents fled, from Afghanistan or as Kurds from Turkey. He said that it is “ very enriching” when such students contribute information and perspectives that the other traditional German students do not have.

ReflectionsThe purpose of this study is to learn from the perspectives of a few teachers in schools that serve students from transnational backgrounds. My intent is not to generalise to all such teachers but to gain insights into what factors might influence some teachers’ understandings and viewpoints. I noticed that among the teachers I interviewed so far, those who had experiences themselves

crossing borders and living in multiple societies – as immigrants and children of immigrants – seemed to have the most awareness of their students’ transnational life experiences.

Overall, a few schools celebrate cultural diversity and everywhere most of the teach-ers with whom I spoke said they enjoyed leading discussions when diverse cultures and views were represented in their classes. However, some teachers from the dominant culture seemed to have only vague ideas of what students’ transnational lives were like out of school. No one mentioned that students’ families came from cultures that had varied political institutions and process-es, that political views and attitudes were formed under differing conditions, and how that might affect the ways students thought of themselves and others as citizens. Some teachers recognized that students’ cultural backgrounds influence how they think about some contemporary social and political is-sues. Over the next year, I will continue to listen to the voices of teachers – and stu-dents – in diverse schools, and I expect that some of these early impressions will change. I welcome comments and participation from readers of this journal as together we tackle the challenges of citizenship educa-tion in varied multicultural democracies. ▪

ReferencesBron, J (2009, November). Personal corre-spondence. Doppen, FH (2008, November). Citizenship education and the Dutch national identity debate. A paper presented at the annual meeting of the College and University As-sembly of the National Council for the Social Studies, Houston. Hahn, CL (1998). Becoming political: Com-parative perspectives on citizenship education. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. Herweijer, L (2009). Making up the gap: Migrant education in the Netherlands. The Hague: The Netherlands Institute for Social Research. Luchtenberg, S (2009). Migrant minority groups in Germany: Success and failure in education. In JA Banks, The Routledge inter-national companion to multicultural education. New York, NY: Routledge.


Reviews

Pros and Cons: A debater’s handbook (18th Edition)Edited by Trevor SatherPublished by Routledge, RRP £22.99 paperback / £85 hardbackISBN 0-415-19548-9Reviewed by Lee Jerome

This is the 18th edition of a book which has been available since 1896, although as the introduction makes clear, each revision is effectively a new book as many topics are dropped and new ones included to reflect topical and debatable issues from the time. The format is very simple – the book in-cludes 130 debate topics, each with several recommended motions, and with a suggest-ed list of points for and against. These topics are divided into sub-sections, which have obvious appeal to Citizenship teachers cover-ing as they do political theory; governance; politics and economics; moral and religious issues; education, culture and sport; law and crime; and health, science and technology.

Inevitably when faced with such a re-source, one identifies a starting point where one has an interest or some expertise – that is most likely to enable one to establish the value of the resource. As a gay man in a civil partnership I alighted first on the debate topic ‘gay marriages’. This entry, unlike some others, has a brief introductory para-graph to set the scene. The function of this paragraph is supposedly to provide a factual introduction, but even within the limited 16 lines dedicated to this context-setting, the author manages to slip in the assertion that

“the gay rights movement has much popular support, especially among the ‘politically correct.’” Without labouring the point, I was dismayed, as I invariably am, by mention of the term ‘politically correct’ in this context. Interestingly though, the author of this entry manages to devise five reasons for and five against gay marriage, whereas the author of the debate on the disestablishment of the Church of England only comes up three points for and three against. It is unclear whether the number of debating points re-flects the editor’s estimation of the degree of controversy, or simply the critical capacities of the author of each section.

Having said this much, it might appear that I do not like the book. In fact, these words of warning aside, I could see this book being useful to teachers trying to set up a debate club or planning to embed debate more routinely in their teaching. It provides some good suggestions for how to frame a mo-tion and importantly provides the possible points for and against which can be used as teaching resources to be critiqued, rather than used as a script for a debate. Often the pros are directly mirrored in the cons, which would enable students to match up the arguments and think about the issues from different perspectives. It might also be useful for students to think about which arguments seem more or less compelling, and whether any important arguments are obviously missing. Older students could also use the book independently as a starting place to help them plan for a debate.

There may be a need for some teacher editing, not least in those introductory para-graphs, which are not always as objective as they set out to be, and which in any case are sometimes out of date, indicating that in these controversial areas, legislation, policy and attitudes are constantly evolving. How-ever, the book provides a useful set of teach-ing resources to be analysed, pulled apart, criticised, and reconstructed – I can imagine those debating points copied onto cards, ready to be subjected to student scrutiny, and thus, with a little bit of teacher input, there are potentially at least 130 lessons packed into this volume. You can ‘look inside’ the book on Amazon and I would recommend doing so. ▪

Lee Jerome is the Chair of the ACT Council and edits the journal. He is also Programme Director for Secondary Initial Teacher Education at London Metropolitan University. Email: [email protected].


Vegetarianism: A Project Book For SchoolsBy the Vegetarian Society Available free from www.vegsoc.orgReviewed by Lee Jerome

Integrating Global and Anti-Racist Perspectives (Secondary Pack)£60 Available from www.garp.me.ukReviewed by David Nisbet

Vegetarianism is one of those interesting areas that often arouses intense emotional responses from teenagers. Whilst on one level it is simply a personal choice about diet, on another level it can be an important personal action which reflects a complex analysis of the global economy – the deci-sion to ‘go veggie’ often represents the first stirrings of political literacy and political agency. Such analyses may reflect concerns with animal welfare, but also relate to the quality of food available, the environmental and social implications of growing crops to feed animals rather than people, and the persistence of hunger and starvation in a world of excess. It is of significance to the Citizenship teacher because (a) young people feel so passionately about it, (b) the personal action may have political causes and effects, (c) a proper analysis of the problem demands a sophisticated understanding of environ-mental, political and economic issues.

This resource makes a start on this chal-lenging agenda, but still leaves the Citizen-ship teacher looking for more information in order to really explore these issues in any depth. Whilst the resource calls itself a project book, there are no activities, and so it would require some additional work to turn it into a classroom project. The Society does produce some other accessible information, and so I would recommend you collect these as supplementary resources, such as a the leaflet ‘Going veggie… for the environment’ which compares quite nicely the resources required for animal rearing compared to the resources required to live directly off the crops themselves.

Overall I’d say this could be a handy resource for teachers to use to engage young people in a debate that matters to many of them, but perhaps some veggie teachers need to help to transform this into a respon-sible take away resource? ▪

This resource aims to encourage global and anti-racist perspectives to be covered across all National Curriculum subjects through the range of lesson ideas included in the pack.

It sets out to achieve this by providing a lever-arch file of detailed booklets, one for each National Curriculum subject and is full of suggested topics, resources and websites. The printed material is backed up with a CD.

The resource does exactly what it sets out to do, providing very accessible booklets which can be given to individual subject areas very easily. It is packed full of good lesson ideas which are linked to the National Curriculum. A lot of time has been spent ensuring that teachers can access a wide variety of interesting topics that are both stimulating to students and which can be integrated into schemes of work rather than simply bolted on at the end of a topic.

The only problem with it is that there is always the risk that when the resources are given out the teachers will not want to give them back! It’s a pity that non-NC subjects miss out eg. Business Studies; Drama.

It is most certainly worth using. I could see this resource being used for a ‘Commu-nity Cohesion’ day, where students follow their normal timetable but cover a GARP topic in each lesson, be it French, PE, Design or whatever. Teachers would simply choose a topic from their resource booklet and run with it in class. ▪

David Nisbet is Assistant Headteacher at Park View School, Chester-le-Street.

Rights and responsibilities are prob-ably among the most commonly taught aspects of Citizenship and yet the level of understanding among many young people, and frankly among many Citizenship teachers, remains limited. If a pupil experienc-es weekly Citizenship lessons for five years of secondary education, and in each of those years learns again about rights and responsibilities, what progression would we expect? What might we reasonably expect a 16 year old to know and understand about rights and responsibilities?

In thinking about these funda-mental questions I recently turned to a fascinating book written by Paul Smith in which he summarises some of the ways in which people have thought about rights and respon-sibilities and in doing so I think he highlights some of the substance that we may be missing from our own subject knowledge.

Distinction 1: Moral Rights v Legal RightsMoral rights are deemed to exist independently of laws, they express

beliefs we hold about what consti-tutes human dignity. Human rights may be seen as moral rights until they are enshrined in legislation.

Distinction 2: Individual v General ResponsibilitiesSome rights are against specific in-dividuals, for example employment rights, whereas others imply duties for everyone, for example property rights require us all not to trespass.

Distinction 3: Positive v Negative RightsPositive rights require others to act to fulfil our rights, for example the right to education requires the state to provide schools. Negative rights on the other hand are rights to non-interference and so they are fulfilled when others do nothing to infringe them, eg. the right not to be killed.

Distinction 4: Civil and Political Rights v Economic and Social RightsCivil Rights are those against the state, for example the right to equal treatment in law, and political rights are rights to participate in the con-trol of the state. Economic and social rights are different in that they refer to rights to benefits provided by the state and as such remain much more politically contentious.

Distinction 5: Rights v ResponsibilitiesWhilst most people link rights and responsibilities the nature of the connection is far from straightfor-ward. There is a general sense in which respecting rights implies

an acceptance of responsibilities – otherwise it is difficult to see how one would expect to have one’s own rights upheld if one had no intention of upholding others. However, many rights exist independently in law and are not therefore directly connected to responsibilities, for example one does not forfeit the right to a fair trial because one has shirked the responsibility to pay taxes.

Distinction 6: Rights and Right ConductThis is perhaps a quirk of the English language but we need to acknowl-edge that claiming one’s rights may not always be the right thing to do, especially if others are harmed by our action.

Taking Smith’s lead on this, knowing that a right exists is only the first step in a nuanced and chal-lenging journey to work out what that actually means. I hope ACT members and others will contribute to the collective endeavour to rise to this challenge by coming to this year’s ACT Conference to reflect, share and learn in order to explore this fascinating concept at the heart of Citizenship.

The ACT Conference for primary and secondary teachers takes place in London on 3rd July. The Children’s Commissioner will open it with a keynote address on our theme of ‘Rights and Responsibilities’. ▪

ReferencePaul Smith (2008) Moral and Political Philosophy Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan (Chapter 7 ‘Rights’).

is our understanding of rights and responsibilities limited?

ually ...


Bentham famously dismissed natural rights as “nonsense on stilts” but rights and responsibilities form one of Citizenship’s core concepts and they are considered to be at the heart of contemporary citizenship theory, argues Lee Jerome.

The Association for Citizenship Teaching (ACT) is the professional membership association for primary and secondary school teachers involved in delivering Citizenship education.

Teaching Citizenship is our magazine. It comes out once a term and is sent direct to all our members. It complements our online resources, our monthly e-newsletters and our face-to-face training or in-school CPD – all these are available to members.

ACT membership provides an outstanding opportunity for professional development, whether you’re new to Citizenship or an old hand. We are a teacher-led independent charity with over 2,000 members across the country, whose principal charitable objective is to further the aims of citizenship teaching and learning.

For teachers, ACT membership is only £35 for the whole year. If you’re not already a member then join now and get your own copy of this magazine – together with all the other support we offer you for teaching citizenship.

To become a member of ACT see:www.teachingcitizenship.org.uk /signup

We provide CPD, teaching resources, policy updates, e-bulletins and more:

l Keep your professional knowledge up to date l Discounts on national and regional CPDl Get Teaching Citizenship delivered to your doorl Link-in to a wealth of experience and expertisel Access teaching resource recommendations onlinel Get specialist advice

YOUR

ADHERE!

Reach an invaluable audience of teachers, educationalists, academics, policy-makers, campaigners, opinion-formers and others engaged in political and civic life. Teaching Citizenship has a circulation of

over 2,500 and is read by many more in staff rooms, libraries and workplaces across the country. (20% discount for ACT members!) To place an advert, or to discuss tailored marketing solutions like inserts, cover mounts etc, contact: Lionel Openshaw, Design & Production Editor email: [email protected] or telephone: 07985 979 390.

There’s never been a better time to advertise in Teaching Citizenship

Life is not a siLent movie

www.youthamplified.com

The first freely available online resource designed to help teachers support young people aged 11 - 18 in the development of essential speaking skills. Featuring animations, real-life student stories, interactive quizzes and exercises, Youth Amplified is designed to help young people gain the skills they need to fulfil their potential and feel confident to contribute effectively at school, in the community and at work. Using the resources, students can identify their strengths and weaknesses, learn about vital speaking skills and improve them with your support through the use of the specially designed exercises.

Created by the University of Leeds and Speakersí Corner Trust. Funded by the Paul Hamlyn Foundation.

Created by the University of Leeds and Speakers’ Corner Trust. Funded by the Paul Hamlyn Foundation.

Created by the University of Leeds and Speakersí Corner Trust. Funded by the Paul Hamlyn Foundation.

teaching citizenship journal / issue 33 / summer 2012

Documents

teaching citizenship

citizenship teaching

heart of citizenship

debate diary

debate debutante

debate04 editorial debate

significant elements

fe page