ConstraintsIntegration of Anti-Corruption Education Values Into Citizenship Education in College. by Dadang Sundawa. Publisher: Ponte Academic Journal. Publication Date: 2019. Publication Name: PONTE International Scientific Researchs Journal. Research Interests: Psychology, Political Science, Citizenship, and Ponte.

1. IntroductionIn 1999, the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement IEA conducted the second international assessment of civic education “responding to the expressed need of many countries for empirical data as they began to rethink their civic education programs in the early 1990s transitions” [1]. This IEA Civic Education Study involved 28 countries and 90,000 students. A decade later, the IEA conducted the third international assessment of civic education, this time involving 38 countries and 120,000 students [2]. The rationale of this study was not the transitions that had characterized the post-cold War world in the 1990s but rather the uncertainties and calamites that followed the destruction of the World Trade Centre in New York on 11 September 2001 and the related terrorist activities in places such as Bali, London and Madrid that followed in quick succession after 2001. Thus the last decade of the twentieth century and the first decade of the twenty first century witnessed global events that placed a spotlight on civic and citizenship education and its role in a changing world. It is important to understand these changing contexts. One pervasive change that has been identified is related to global economic integration and in particular the growth and influence of technology in the global economy. Often referred to as “globalization”, this increasing integration has highlighted the interdependence of the world economy and the extent to which technology has enhanced this interdependence. For example, individuals across the globe continue to be located in a common geographic space such as China or Germany or the United States of America. Yet increasingly what happens in one society influences what happens in another. The manufacture of clothes in China impacts on prices and work opportunities for citizens in the United States, the financial crisis of 2008 could not be contained in a single geographic space and prices for drugs determined in Western nations impact on access to these drugs by people in developing countries. Yet globalization is not only economic in nature. Local cultures can also be challenged by technology enhanced processes that lead to more globalized music, fashion and food. These in turn may have economic impacts on local societies. As Mok [3] has pointed out “no matter how we assess the impact of globalization, it is undeniable that contemporary societies are not entirely immune from the prominent global forces”.While the forces of globalization have been unmistakable across the international landscape, there have also been forces that have highlighted the continuing and significant role of individual nations. Kennedy [4] pointed to three broad elements that account for the continuing strength of nation states—the existence of states with strong governance structures, the increasing emphasis on national security in the light of 9/11 and the responses to the 2008 financial crisis that witnessed considerable intervention on the part of national governments. He has referred to these phenomena as a kind of “neo-statism” signaling the ongoing role of nation states even in an increasingly globalized world. As Keating [5] commented, “the nation-state model continues to have a grip on the intellectual imagination and its normative elements survive in much writing about politics”. The reason for this is not so much a romantic attachment to the nation state. Rather, it is because the everyday lives of citizens continue to be influenced by the decisions of national government whether they are concerned with new financial regulations, new state security arrangements or the variety of laws that cover such areas as transport, housing and education. Kennedy [4] has also pointed to the influence of non-state actors on the international landscape and the need for civic and citizenship education to take account of these. Such actors have been responsible for the ongoing terrorism that has characterized much of the 21st century. The most well known is perhaps Al Qaeda but there are many more smaller groups and sometimes individuals who take it on themselves to threaten citizens directly through the destruction of buildings, and other public infrastructure. While such non state actors have come to characterize the current century they have their origins in much earlier times whenever individuals took action against governments and their follow citizens. Kennedy [4] has commented on the need to make such groups the focus of citizenship education “since understanding such individuals and groups, knowing how to respond to them and knowing how to respond to state actions against them should be part and parcel of any citizenship education program. Citizens must be equipped to handle complex ideas and ideologies if they are to contribute to their societies in a constructive way—traditional approaches to citizenship education may not always achieve this end”.The kind of changes referred to above may be described in different ways—they may be characterized as economic, social or political or a combination of all of these. Yet what they achieve together are changes to the conditions of citizenship. In these new contexts, citizenship is no longer stable, no longer able to rely on a single national space or remain sheltered from decisions made thousands of kilometers away. A key issued raised by these phenomena is how to prepare citizens to negotiate and respond to these new contexts. What is the role of civic and citizenship education as both a component of the school curriculum and a social construct designed to serve the needs of changing nation states? The purpose of this paper is to review the status of civic and citizenship education across different regions and within specific national jurisdictions in order to see what changes, if any, have taken place over the past two decades in response to changes in the macro environment. It will do so by drawing on both theoretical and empirical analyses to address the following issuesHow do theoretical isssues construct civic education?How is content in civic education regarded across nations?How do education systems make provision for civic education?How is civic learning best facilitated and what are the implications for the school curriculum? 2. Theoretical Issues and Civic EducationThere are many different ways in which to examine the theoretical issues influencing civic education. In this section, it will be shown how civic and citizenship education and broader conceptions of citizenship can be related. It will also be shown how conceptions of civic and citizenship education itself often serve to construct the school subject in a particular way. Both ways of looking at civic and citizenship education have implications for it as a discipline of and citizenship education can be a policy initiated by a government, a program run in a school, a lesson taught by a teacher or an activity experienced by a student. The common element across these different ways of thinking about civic education is the focus on a special aspect of the school curriculum—the aspect that is specifically concerned with the education of young people to become citizens of the future. Torney-Purta et al. [1] made the point “that civic education content is often less codified and less formalized compared to other subjects” and this was “related to the uncertainty in conceptualizing civic education knowledge due to the amalgamated disciplinary base of the subject and teachers’ varied subject matter backgrounds”. As a part of the school curriculum, therefore, civic education is unlike traditional subjects such as Mathematics, Language or History. That is, it is not so much about mastering a specific body of knowledge or skills—although civic and citizenship education can be knowledge or skills oriented. Rather, it is primarily about understanding the political processes that regulate the daily lives of individuals in any society. This is a key point to understand when considering civic and citizenship education because, as shown above, it is these very processes that have been transformed over the past two decades. Table 1 summarizes the complex debates that highlight the transformations that have taken place in recent times. The transformations challenge the traditional argument that citizenship is primarily a legal status conferred by one country on the people who live within its borders. This argument is historically located. The history of Europe and North America from the late eighteenth century up to and including the early twentieth century very much focused on the development of individual nations that provided special privileges for their citizens—for example, the right to vote in elections, the right to stand for election, the right to receive economic and social benefits from the government. Citizens are still privileged within the borders of their nations and their rights are guaranteed within these geographic spaces. Yet they must now look beyond borders because the daily lives of citizens can be as much influenced by forces outside those borders as from within. Table 1. Changing and conflicting conceptions of citizenship. Table 1. Changing and conflicting conceptions of citizenship. Key ideas on citizenshipAuthorIndividual nations have been the building blocks on which notions of citizenship have been built. Individuals within nations are seen to share common bonds that bring them together to create a distinctive groupSee [6,7] on this point The increased economic interaction of nations in the late twentieth century has meant that there is greater interdependence among nations. This interdependence is sometimes referred to as “globalization”. Since citizens now depend not only on their own nation but others as well, ideas have developed that citizenship itself should be broader than a single nationOhmae[8] has written about “the end of the nation state” Reid, Gill & Sears [9] have examined the impact of globalization on civic educationAltman [10] has written about the apparently diminishing impact of globalization’ in the light of the renewed strength of nation states following the 2008 financial crisisTo try and provide a different perspective on citizenship there has been discussion, some people have talked about “global citizenship” or “cosmopolitanism”. The idea has been to suggest a broader understanding of citizenship linked to international rather than national frameworks of involvement and engagement[11,12] The best example of looking beyond borders can be seen in the European Union that has since its beginning promoted the idea of European citizenship. To be a citizen of Europe one must first be a citizen of a member nation. Thus within the European Union, individuals have “two citizenships” the traditional national citizenship and European citizenship. This is an important point because it means that one citizenship does not cancel out the other but rather one citizenship complements the other. European citizenship also confers additional rights, for example the right to travel across borders of member countries and the right to vote in European elections. The link between citizenship and rights is therefore maintained in this dual citizenship context. The European Union example supports the idea that in these new times, citizenship is a more complex issue that it has been in the past and there should be new ways of thinking about it to meet new developments and issues. If the idea of citizenship is changing, it follows that ideas about civic and citizenship education should also be changing. Yet such changes are by no means simple. Civic and citizenship education has been embedded in traditional theoretical frameworks that assume it is linked to the needs of individual nations. This is made more complex because there is no single overarching theory—but multiple theories. Civic republicanism, for example, assumes “that individuals come together around common purposes, common values and a common good. The responsibility of citizenship, therefore, is to contribute actively to the “common-wealth” and to recognize at times that individual interests might need to be subjugated to a higher common good” [13]. In opposition to this view is a more full blown liberalism that leads to “a citizenship premised on individual rights giving priority to the interests of individuals rather than the interests of larger groups to which individuals belong. Freedom in all spheres of activity is the catch cry of liberal citizenshi [14]. There are different versions of this liberal conception of citizenship. Howard and Patten [15], for example, refer to neo-liberal discourses that influence civic education pointing to dissolution of restrictions within society that prevent individuals from making their own way in the social and economic spheres of activity. The neo-liberal citizen is a self regulating individual without the need for any government support at all and on whom there are no restrictions. Then there is Rawl’s [16] version of political liberalism that argues for restrictions on the role of the state on what should and should not be taught as part of civic education in a pluralistic society. In Rawl’s view there should be no single ideology guiding civic education apart from shared political values necessary for the maintenance of a democratic society. This is the only way to protect religious pluralism that for Rawls lies outside the political realm. While these theoretical frameworks contain major differences that are philosophical and ideological in nature, they share one thing in common. They have been applied to civic and citizenship education on the assumption that it is embedded within individual nations. This reflects the historic nation building role of civic and citizenship education but it does not take into account the changing nature of citizenship in a post-modern world. New formulations based on global conceptions of citizenship are making their presence felt [9,17,18] and these provide alternative narratives for citizenship. But the older theoretical frameworks continue to hold sway. Howard and Patten [15], for example, identified neo-liberal influences on recent civic education curriculum in Australia. Lockyer [19] identified strands of both liberalism and civic republicanism in the United Kingdom’s Citizenship curriculum. The focus on human rights in the civic and citizenship education curriculum of many countries is a reflection of commitments to classical liberalism and individual freedom. While there are many international policy instruments that seek to safeguard these rights, the best protections and indeed the worst abuses come from within the borders of nation states. The older theoretical frames have not disappeared. In their different ways they continue to exert a nation building influence alongside the newer narratives that provide a broader framework in which to locate citizens’ needs and interests. A good example of how the old and the new sit side by side can be seen in the Asia Pacific region. Kennedy [13] showed that while liberalizing tendencies had powerfully affected economic growth and development in many Asian countries and that this in turn had led to widespread curriculum reform, that the same liberal tendencies had not been applied to the civic education curriculum. As Kennedy [13] pointed out “there is not a single case represented where the nation state has eased its grip on citizenship education as a major means of inducting young citizens into the culture and values of the nation state itself. This is as true for the United States as it is for the People’s Republic of China, for Australia as it is for Malaysia, for New Zealand as it is for Pakistan”. There can thus be both recognition of the powerful influence of globalizing forces and a deliberate intention to resist such forces in key aspects of a nation’s life. Steiner-Khamsi & Stolpe [20] have demonstrated this same process with particular reference to economic and social development in Mongolia. Here there has been both incorporation of global influences and considerable local agency to resist those influences where local values were seen to be of greater priority. This dual approach to globalization suggests that national and global narratives relating to citizenship will continue to exist side by side rather than one being replaced by the other. It should not, therefore, be assumed that globalization and global citizenship go hand in hand. Indeed the Asian cases demonstrate the opposite—the stronger the processes of globalization the more resistant nation states may be in protecting their future final theoretical issue concerned with civic education relevant to the current theme is the tendency to regard the so called “content” of civic education as more process than specific subject matter. Table 2 shows how different approaches to the assessment of civic education highlight process over content. It is not that civic knowledge is absent altogether from these examples see the Australian example but on balance, there is more emphasis on processes than content. This may reflect the fact that in three of the four cases, the assessments apply across countries so the selection of specific content would be very difficult, especially in the international assessments that can apply to over thirty countries. Yet even in the Australian example that does have a specific knowledge domain, the way in which the specific assessment domains are described make it clear that the knowledge being referred to here is almost exclusively national political knowledge. This point is highlighted in Table 3 that compares the key performance measures for Australian students in Year 6 and Year 10. The main point to note about these measures is that they are almost exclusively focused on the national political system and national political institutions. There is one exception, and that is the reference to “analyzing Australia’s role as a nation in the global community”. This may not necessarily be a reference to the impact of globalization or to the changing nature of citizenship in a global context. Rather, it is more likely to focus on the development of Australia in various regional and international contexts as a member of the Asia Pacific Education Community and the United Nations. This simply reinforces the point that civic knowledge in these global times is more likely to be constructed as local or at best national. The example used here is from Australia, but it is likely to reflect priorities elsewhere as well. It is national rather than global priorities that continue to dominate civic education. At times, as shown in Table 2, the focus may not even be on knowledge at all, but on processes of participation and engagement. Table 2. Process approaches to content in civic education. Table 2. Process approaches to content in civic education. Jurisdiction/PurposeDomainsAustralia National Assessment Program—Civics and Citizenship Education Year 6 Assessment 2004 [21]Civics Knowledge and Understanding of Civic Institutions and ProcessesCitizenship Dispositions &Skills for ParticipationEuropean Union survey of citizenship education [22]Political LiteracyAttitudes/ValuesActive ParticipationSecond IEA Civic Education Study [1]Democracy/CitizenshipInternational RelationsSocial Cohesion/DiversityInternational Civic and Citizenship Study [2]Civic Society & SystemsCivic PrinciplesCivic ParticipationCivic Identities Table 3. Key performance measures in the civic knowledge domain the Australian example [21]. Table 3. Key performance measures in the civic knowledge domain the Australian example [21]. Civic Knowledge and Understanding of Civic InstitutionsYear 6Year Recognize key features of Australian Recognise that perspectives on Australian democratic ideas and civic institutions vary and change over Describe the development of Australian self-government and Understand the ways in which the Australian Constitution impacts on the lives of Australian Outline the roles of political and civic institutions in Understand the role of law-making and governance in Australia’s democratic Understand the purposes and processes of creating and changing rules and Understand the rights and responsibilities of citizens in a range of Identify the rights and responsibilities of citizens in Australia’s Analyse how Australia’s ethnic and cultural diversity contribute to Australian democracy, identity and social Recognise that Australia is a pluralist society with citizens of diverse ethnic origins and cultural Analyse Australia’s role as a nation in the global community What can be concluded from this exploration of theoretical issues influencing civic education? First, it has to be recognized that civic and citizenship education has been developed as a strategy used across nations to support the values, structures and priorities of individual nations. Many of the theoretical frameworks referred to above take this as a given in their analyses of citizenship and the various forms it might take within the nation state. Yet citizenship within nation states is no longer something that can be treated in isolation from the broader global environment. Second, there are multiple forces within this environment that often seem to be pulling in different directions. Globalization has tended to locate influence and power outside of nation states but more recent concerns for national security and global financial stability have increased the influence of national governments. Third, traditionally there has been a focus in civic and citizenship education on processes civic engagement and participation and any focus on civic knowledge has been on national political knowledge structures rather than on knowledge that would help students understand global processes, structures and systems. In the remainder of this paper it will be important to keep these points in mind because they relate to key issues that will be discussed and they will be reviewed again towards the end of the paper. 3. The Content of Civic Education—A Cross National PerspectiveGiven the different theoretical frameworks in which civic and citizenship education might be developed, it is important to examine the curriculum itself to see how different countries prioritize specific content for civic education. It is possible to gain an overview of civic education content because of the recently completed International Civics and Citizenship Study [2] that asked the 38 participating countries to provide data on the priorities for civic education. The responses have been summarized in Figure 1. Figure 1. Curriculum emphases for civic education identified by education systems participating in the international civic and citizenship study countries [2]. Figure 1. Curriculum emphases for civic education identified by education systems participating in the international civic and citizenship study countries [2]. The first point to note is that while there is some similarities in terms of emphases, there is no common core of civic knowledge that can be identified across participating education systems. There is only one topic that 80% of countries identified as a major emphasis, “Legal Systems and Courts”. “Understanding Different Cultures and Ethnic Groups” was a major emphasis in over 70% of countries. These were followed by “Human Rights” the “Environment” and “Parliament and Government Systems” After these topics there is much less agreement on what represents major emphases across the thirty eight countries. Perhaps more importantly, however, topics that might reflect a more international or global perspective—“The Global Community and International Organizations” and “Regional Institutions and Organizations”—are seen as major emphases in civic education for less than 30% of the participating countries. The same topics do not feature at all in and 21% of countries respectively. Other topics such as “Human Rights” and the “Environment” may well have global dimensions, but the other topics where there is a major emphasis appear to be more related to local civic organizations or issues. Based on this analysis, therefore, it seems that local rather than global perspectives continue to dominate the civic education curriculum suggesting that the preparation of future citizens continues to be focused on national citizenship. This analysis supports the trend shown in Table 3 referring specifically to the case of Australia where the focus of the civic component of the national civic assessment was also on national and local political systems. Another perspective on the importance of national priorities in civic and citizenship education can be seen from countries’ endorsement of the importance of developing a sense of national identity and allegiance. 47% of countries indicated that this was a major emphasis in terms of civic processes emphasized in civic education, 42% of countries indicated there was some emphasis on it and 11% of countries indicated there was no emphasis on it [2]. This is not to say that there are not other persepctivres included in national curriculum or that if the question had been asked about global persepctives that it may not have received a positive response. For example, in the United Kingdom’s Citizenship curriculum for students to be assessed at Level 6 and above, they must be able to “show understanding of interdependence, describing interconnections between people and their actions in the UK, Europe and the wider world” [23]. Yet national perspectives remain dominant in civic education even where there may be a recognition that students should look beyond the borders of their respective it is also possible to examine the way teachers participating in the ICCS viewed the importance of civic content. Table 4 shows content areas and teachers’ responses to them. Table 4. Teachers’ perceptions of important aims for civic education. Table 4. Teachers’ perceptions of important aims for civic education. Aims for civic educationPercentages of teachers considering these aims for civic education importantn = 30 countriesInternational Average %Range %Promoting knowledge of social, political and civic institutions3316–57Promoting respect for and safeguard of the environment4122–61Promoting the capacity to defend one’s own point of view204–8Developing students’ skills and competencies in conflict resolution4121–73Promoting knowledge of citizens’ rights and responsibilities6037–73Promoting students’ participation in the local community162–40Promoting students’ critical and independent thinking5219–84Promoting students’ participation in school life199–5Supporting the development of effective strategies for the fight against racism and xenophobia101–31Preparing students for future political participation71–19 From the perspective of teachers in 30 countries, the top four aims of civic education are “Promoting knowledge of citizens” rights and responsibilities 60%, “Promoting students’ critical and independent thinking” 52% and “Promoting respect for and safeguard of the environment”/“Developing students skills and competencies in conflict resolution” 41% each. Given that these were forced category choices, teachers did not get the opportunity to express their views about global citizenship or global issues. Nevertheless, the focus of these top four aims clearly show that civic and citizenship education in these different national contexts emphasise the social and the personal aspects of the subject. It seems that for teachers, equipping individual students with skills that will help them negotiate a complex and uncertain world, is a priority. It is of interest to note that “Promoting knowledge of social, political and civic institutions” rates relatively poorly 33% of teachers on average regard it is important in at least one country the figure is as low as 16% of teachers. Lower still is any focus on “Preparing students for future political participation” with an international average of only 7% of teachers seeing it as important. This suggests that the political roles of citizens are not regarded as important by teachers, particularly when compared to the personal and social roles that students can play as future citizens. Finally, it can be seen that processes rather than specific content dominate civic education. Yet how are these aims realized in the actual curriculum? This issue will be addressed in the following section. 4. Curriculum Structures for Civic EducationThe organization of the school curriculum highlights and what is considered valued knowledge for young people. It would be likely across countries to find that Mathematics, Science and mother tongue Language will be separate subjects with specific time allocations. In addition, perhaps History and Geography or some integrated version such as Social Studies will also find a similar place. Then there may also be room for Physical Education, Art, Music and Health Education. Where does Civic Education fit alongside these formal subjects in the school curriculum?Kennedy [14] proposed a framework for considering the curriculum status of civic education. It highlighted four possible modes of delivery as a single subject, taught through other subjects such as History and Geography, integrated across all subjects or as an extra curricular activity. In a subsequent study, Fairbrother and Kennedy [24] showed students who experienced Civic Education as a separate subject did produce higher scores on civic learning outcome measures and the differences were statistically significantly different from those of students who experienced Civic Education in other modes. Yet the mode of curriculum delivery did not account for a significant proportion of the variance in students’ learning outcomes. Other factors need to be identified that impact on the recent ICCS [2] Table 2 the curriculum delivery modes themselves were re-categorized and expanded from Kennedy’s [14] four to eight Specific subject compulsory or optional;Integrated into several subjects;Cross curricular;Assemblies and special events;Extra- curricular activities;Classroom experience/ethos; interesting point to note about participating countries’ responses to these curriculum delivery categories is that apart from compulsory/optional choice they were not seen to be mutually exclusive. Thus all countries indicating Civic Education was a compulsory single subject representing 45% of the total number of countries also indicated other curriculum delivery modes were used as well. For example, Chinese Taipei selected “compulsory specific subject”, “cross curricular”, “assemblies and special events”, “extra-curricular activities” and “classroom experiences/ethos” whereas Estonia selected “compulsory specific subject”, “integrated into several subjects” and “cross curricula”. There is, therefore, not a single curriculum delivery mode for civic education but multiple modes. This is also true where Civic Education is not a single subject see, for example, Hong Kong, Finland and Denmark [2] Table 2. A key point that arises from this phenomenon is to consider what it means for Civic Education as a observation to make on this issue is that the new curriclum delivery categories addded by the ICCS were towards the informal civic learning end of the curriculum. This suggests that while there may be formal curriuclum content to be covered for example 45% of countries indicated Civic Education was a “compulsory specific subject” and 81% indicated it was “integrated into several subjects” there were also aspects of Civic Ecuation that fell outside of these subject boundaries into more informal activities for example assemblies, extra curricular activities and classroom ethos. This makes Civic Education somewhat exceptional since its boundaries are so flexible. It also raises the important question of civic learning and how this can best be facilitated for curriuclum exepriences that extend beyond the formal curriuclum. . This issue will be taken up in the following section. 5. Facilitating Civic Learning and the Implications for the School CurriculumResearchers on civic learning—including those responsible for the ICCS—have tended to focus on those structural variables that influence student learning—socioeconomic status, gender, immigrant status, etc. These are always telling and are important control variables, but the issue of interest to teachers is what can be done to promote civic learning both within classrooms and beyond them into schools and the community. The responses in the research literature tend to suggest that there are instructional strategies and school activities that do support student’s civic learning. An “open classroom climate” within classrooms and the use of School Parliaments involving students are two processes that have been found to be positively related to students’ civic learning [1]. These are things that teachers and schools can well manage and go beyond the structural and demographic characteristics of students. There are other strategies that were identified in the context of the IEA Civic education study [1]. Turney-Purta and Barber, [25] reported that reading newspapers is a moderate predictor of students’ likelihood to vote βs across their European sample were ≥ 10, ≤ 21. Torney-Purta et al [1], reported that the frequency of watching TV and news amongst the international sample was also a moderate predictor of students’ likelihood to vote in the future β = 13. These could be activities that take place out of school. Yet given that there are differential levels of trust in the media across countries they could equally well take place within school if they were developed as instructional and learning activities. Husfeldt, Barber and Torney-Purta [26] developed a new Trust in Media Scale but have also raised the question of whether students are able to apply critical skills to the task. Amadeo, Torney-Purta and Barber [27] have shown the positive relationship between media consumption and both students’ civic knowledge and their attitude to future civic engagement. Torney-Purta and Barber [25] have pointed out “school-based programs that introduce students to newspapers and foster skills in interpreting political information may be of value”. This may be a particularly important thing to do for students whose home environments do not provide them with these informal learning opportunities. These are more examples of how schools and teachers can make a difference to civic consideration of civic learning raises an important question about the nature of civic and citizenship education as a “discipline”. It is concerned with both “content” and “pedagogy”, and it is not enough to consider either in isolation. The influential report, The Civic Mission of Schools [28,29] made this point very strongly. The report argued that while civic knowledge is an essential part of any civic education, it cannot be delivered in such a way as to alienate students or lead them to become disengaged from learning. The kind of teaching and learning strategies referred to above are as much a part of the discipline as the specific knowledge itself. Pedagogy and content must be integrated for civic education what needs to be learnt should be constructed in a learning environment that is at once relevant, meaningful and engaging to students. Because civic education, in liberal democracies at least, is about supporting democratic structures and systems, then teaching strategies need also to be democratic otherwise there will be a conflict between the content and the pedagogy. This is an important issue for the development of civic and citizenship education in the future. 6. ConclusionsThe many changes in the external environment have focused attention on civic and citizenship education over the past two decades. Many countries have responded to these changes by reinforcing the civic and citizenship education curriculum but there has been no standard approach internationally. Diversity rather than uniformity is the main characteristic of the civic curriculum. In terms of aims, teaching strategies and delivery mechanisms, there is considerable variability across countries. Successive international assessment studies have not isolated the variables that can account for successful civic learning. Rather, a combination of structural characteristics for example, socioeconomic status, gender and immigrant status combined with student focused instructional strategies and democratic decision making processes seem to be the most likely explanations for different levels of civic learning. Yet much remains to be done to identify other variables that impact on student learning in civic education. In terms of specific content for civic education, it seems that at the present time, despite the significant changes to the external environment, the focus is on national political structures and systems. While more detailed examination of specific curricula is needed to confirm this finding, it does seem that in a number of jurisdictions at least the emphasis is on the social and personal aspects of civic education rather than on the political or global aspects. This is despite the changes that were documented at the beginning of this paper. Global citizenship, while the vision of some academics and community supporters, remains at some distance from national curricula where, to use Keating’s [5] terms, “the nation-state model continues to have a grip on the intellectual imagination” ReferencesTorney-Purta, J.; Lehmann, R.; Oswald, H.; Schulz, W. Citizenship and Education in Twenty-Eight Countries Civic Knowledge and Engagement at Age Fourteen; IEA Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2001. [Google Scholar]Schulz, W.; Ainley, J.; Fraillon, J.; Kerr, D.; Losito, B. Initial Findings from the IEA International Civic and Citizenship Education Study; IEA Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2010. [Google Scholar]Mok, Education Reform and Education Policy in East Asia; Routledge London, UK, 2006. [Google Scholar]Kennedy, K. Neo-statism and post-globalization as contexts for new times. In Globalisation, the Nation-State and the Citizen Dilemmas and Directions for Civics and Citizenship Education; Reid, A., Gill, J., Sears, A., Eds.; Routledge London, UK, 2010; pp. 223–229. [Google Scholar]Keating, M. Rescaling Europe. Perspect. Eur. Polit. Soc. 2009, 10, 1570–1585. [Google Scholar]Green, A. Education and state formation in Europe and Asia. In Citizenship Education and the Modern State; Kennedy, K., Ed.; Falmer London, UK, 1997; pp. 9–27. [Google Scholar]Davies, C. Concentric, overlapping and competing loyalties and identities. In Nationalism in Education; Schleicher, K., Ed.; Peter Lang Frankfort, Germany, 1993. [Google Scholar]Ohmae, K. The End of the Nation State; Harper Collins Publisher London, UK, 1995. [Google Scholar]Reid, A.; Gill, J.; Sears, A. Globalisation, the Nation-State and the Citizen Dilemmas and Directions for Civics and Citizenship Education; Routledge New York, NY, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]Altman, R. Globalization in retreat—Further geopolitical consequences of the financial crisis. Foreign Aff. 2009, 88, 2–7. [Google Scholar]Marshall, H. Educating the European citizen in the global age Engaging with the post-national and identifying a research agenda. J. Curric. Stud. 2009, 41, 247–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]Van den Anker, C. Transnationalism and cosmopolitanism Towards global citizenship? J. Int. Polit. Theory 2010, 6, 73–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]Kennedy, K. Globalized economies liberalized curriculum reform and national citizenship education New challenges for national citizenship education. In Citizenship Curriculum in Asia and the Pacific; Grossman, Lee, Kennedy, K., Eds.; Comparative Education Research Centre Hong Kong, China, 2008; pp. 13–28. [Google Scholar]Kennedy, The citizenship curriculum Ideology, content and organization. In The SAGE Handbook Of Education for Citizenship And Democracy; SAGE Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2008; pp. 483–491. [Google Scholar]Howard, C.; Patten, S. Valuing civics Political commitment and the new citizenship education in Australia. Can. J. Educ. 2006, 29, 454–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]Rawls, J. Political Liberalism; Columbia University Press New York, NY, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]Keyman, F.; Icduygu, A. Citizenship in a Global World European Questions and Turkish Experiences; Routledge New York, NY, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]Isin, E. Democracy, Citizenship and the Global City; Routledge London, UK, 2000. [Google Scholar]Lockyer, A. Introduction and review. In Education for Democratic Citizenship—Issues of Theory and Practice; Lockyer, A., Ed.; Ashgate Publishing Limited Aldershot, UK, 2003; pp. 1–15. [Google Scholar]Steiner-Khamsi, G.; Stolpe, I. Educational Import Local Encounters with Global Forces in Mongolia; Palgrave MacMillan London, UK, 2006. [Google Scholar]Ministerial Council on Education, Employment Training, and Youth. National Assessment Program—Years 6 and 10 Civics and Citizenship Report; Curriculum Corporation Melbourne, Australia, 2006. Available online accessed 19 June 2012.European Commission Directorate-General for Education and Culture. Citizenship Education at School in Europe; Eurydice European Unit Brussels, Belgium, 2005. Available online accessed 19 June 2012.Attainment Target for Citizenship Homepage. Available online accessed on 15 June 2012.Fairbrother, G.; Kennedy, K. Civic education curriculum reform in Hong Kong What should be the direction under Chinese sovereignty? Cambridge J. Educ. 2012, in press.. [Google Scholar]Torney-Purta, J.; Barber, C. Democratic School Engagement and Civic Participation among European Adolescents; IEA Amesterdam, The Netherlands, 2005. Available online accessed on 15 June 2012.Husfeldt, V.; Barber, C.; Torney-Purta, J. Students’ Social Attitudes and Expected Political Participation New Scales in the Enhanced Database of the IEA Civic Education Study; Civic Education Data and Researcher Services College Park, MD, USA, 2005. Available online accessed on 15 June 2012.Amadeo, J.; Torney-Purta, J.; Barber, Attention to Media and Trust in Media Sources Analysis of Data from the IEA Civic Education Study; The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement College Park, MD, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]Gould, J. Guardian of Democracy The Civic Mission of Schools; The Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement College Park, MD, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]Carnegie Corporation of New YorkThe Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement CIRCLEThe Civic Mission of Schools; Carnegie Corporation of New York and CIRCLE College Park, MD, USA, 2003. © 2012 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license

To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the author.... If England's identity was seen to rest in the diversity of landscapes, cultures and regional identities, the Cotswolds could be identified as the 'best of England' because of, not in spite of, its apparent difference from other regions Brace, C. 1999 Hasil diatas selaras dengan apa yang disampaikan oleh Kerr 1999 tentang konsep pendidikan kewarganegaran pertama, pendidikan tentang kewarganegaraan yang berfokus untuk memberikan pengetahuan yang cukup tentang sejarah nasional, struktur, dan proses serta kehidupan politik pada pemerintahan. Kedua, pendidikan melalui kewarganegaraan mengajak siswa untuk terlibat langsung dengan melakukan kegiatan dan berpartisipasi aktif dalam pembelajaran disekolah. ...... Sedangkan jatidiri "citizenship education" model UK yang menggunakan perspektif internasional Kerr, 1999, termasuk model "thick citizenship education" yang memiliki visi maksimum yakni "Education FOR Citizenship" dengan modus "across curriculum". Pendidikan kewarganegaraan tidaklah secara khusus sebagai suatu mata pelajaran atau suatu topik, melainkan secara sistemik dimasukkan ke dalam keseluruhan tatanan kurikulum dengan memasukkannya ke dalam mata pelajaran yang ada Winataputra, US. 2015 67. ...... Inggris yang di dalam perspektif internasionalKerr, 1999 termasuk model "thick citizenship education" yang memiliki visi maksimum yakni "Education FOR Citizenship" dengan modus "across curriculum".Analisis Perbandingan dan Beberapa PenemuanSetelah diuraikan tentang latar belakang dan kurikulum pendidikan kewarganegaraan di dua negara yaitu Korea Selatan dan Inggris. Dari keempat fokus kajian terdapat beberapa perbedaan dan persamaan yang dirangkum pada tabel 1. Perbandingan Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan Korea Selatan dan Inggris ...Fatikha FauziahPendidikan diyakini berperan penting dalam memajukan peradaban bangsa. Hampir setiap negara menanamkan kewarganegaraan melalui pendidikan dengan cara yang berbeda-beda. Perbedaan ini dilatarbelakangi oleh perkembangan sejarah, ekonomi, identitas nasional, dan budaya setiap negara. Artikel ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis pendidikan kewarganegaraan di Korea Selatan dan Inggris dengan menggali atribut yang melatarbelakanginya. Kedua negara dipilih karena memiliki kesebandingan yakni maju dalam bidang industry. Hasil telaah menunjukkan bahwa terdapat perbedaan kurikulum pendidikan kewarganegaraan di kedua negara. Inti dari pendidikan kewarganegaraan civic virtue di Korea Selatan berasal dari budaya dan keyaninan, yakni budaya konfusianisme dan agama leluhur. Sedangkan, inti pendidikan kewarganegaraan di Inggris berasal dari sejarah dan ideologinya. Kata kunci Pendidikan kewarganegaraan, Korea Selatan, Inggris... En correspondencia con lo planteado, en la literatura sobre el tema se pueden encontrar dos clasificaciones claramente diferenciadas de formación ciudadana, las que pueden ser asumidas en los procesos formativos, en este sentido, el enfoque maximalista Kerr, 1999 que se relaciona con la construcción de una comunidad política y nacional que se sustenta en la memoria colectiva con valores y proyectos compartidos Magendzo y Pávez, 2016;Giroux, 2003, lo que implica la participación en acciones orientadas al bien común, que funden una sociedad más justa e inclusiva de minorías. En contraposición a lo anterior, el enfoque minimalista Kerr, 1999 y técnico que la sitúa en la educación cívica, la aparta del compromiso político y se corresponde con el individualismo que debilita los vínculos entre las personas. ...... En correspondencia con lo planteado, en la literatura sobre el tema se pueden encontrar dos clasificaciones claramente diferenciadas de formación ciudadana, las que pueden ser asumidas en los procesos formativos, en este sentido, el enfoque maximalista Kerr, 1999 que se relaciona con la construcción de una comunidad política y nacional que se sustenta en la memoria colectiva con valores y proyectos compartidos Magendzo y Pávez, 2016;Giroux, 2003, lo que implica la participación en acciones orientadas al bien común, que funden una sociedad más justa e inclusiva de minorías. En contraposición a lo anterior, el enfoque minimalista Kerr, 1999 y técnico que la sitúa en la educación cívica, la aparta del compromiso político y se corresponde con el individualismo que debilita los vínculos entre las personas. ...... Se evidencia que los líderes educativos presentan diferentes aproximaciones al concepto formación ciudadana FC, las que, a su vez, están mediadas por distintos factores. Así se refleja en las entrevistas, las que recogen una concepción de la FC relacionada con el componente cívico y a la vez vinculante con la educación cívica, quedando la formación ciudadana relegada a un plano principalmente disciplinario lo que se podría definir desde una postura más técnica y minimalista Kerr, 1999, donde lo importante son los contenidos de la FC relacionados con el conocimiento del funcionamiento de las instituciones del Estado ...El artículo indaga en las concepciones explícitas de los equipos directivos respecto de la formación ciudadana y su implicancia en el ejercicio del liderazgo escolar en centros educativos de la región de La Araucanía Chile. La relevancia del estudio se enmarca en la promulgación de la Ley de Formación Ciudadana en los establecimientos educativos. La investigación adopta un enfoque cualitativo con un diseño exploratorio, que permite un primer acercamiento al objeto de estudio aportando evidencia al campo de la formación ciudadana. Se entrevistaron directivos de diez establecimientos educacionales. Los resultados muestran que existen diferentes concepciones y aproximaciones a la formación ciudadana y que estas se orientan en la comprensión del constructo, la formación de la persona y su relación con la convivencia en sociedad, los valores, el territorio y la cultura.... Although there has been global revitalization of interest for CEE, since the 1990s, many studies pointed out that there is a substantial mismatch between rhetoric policy and school reality of Civics and Ethical Education and consequently, the desire of nations to cultivate good citizens is not adequately materialized Kerr, 1999;Alan and Andrew, 1996;MOE, 2006;MOE, 2007. For instance, after conducting a research on the status of citizenship education in sixteen countries, Kerr 1999 concluded that the ways schools and teachers manage and implement the curriculum of citizenship education in many countries contradict with their national curriculum policies. ...... Although there has been global revitalization of interest for CEE, since the 1990s, many studies pointed out that there is a substantial mismatch between rhetoric policy and school reality of Civics and Ethical Education and consequently, the desire of nations to cultivate good citizens is not adequately materialized Kerr, 1999;Alan and Andrew, 1996;MOE, 2006;MOE, 2007. For instance, after conducting a research on the status of citizenship education in sixteen countries, Kerr 1999 concluded that the ways schools and teachers manage and implement the curriculum of citizenship education in many countries contradict with their national curriculum policies. This was well observed in many schools of Hungary, Japan and Korea Ibid. ...... However, these studies lack consistency concerning the cause/s and degree of this gap. For example, the major factor according to Kerr 1999 was the attempt of the cUlTiculum policy makers to bring a drastic change in teacher attitude and classroom practice in a relatively short period. Alan and Andrew 1996 on the other hand contend that the maj or factors that attributed for rhetoric -practice gap were more of school/teacher related. ... Mulugeta Yayeh WorkuThe purpose of this study was to describe and understand the implementation process of civic and ethical education curriculum, from different perspectives of practitioners in Nigus Tekle Haimanot primary school. To this end, much consideration was given for the investigation of practitioners’ conception and attitudes, school ethos and strategies, the involvement of stakeholders, instructional strategies, and the availability and utilization of instructional materials in relation to the implementation of the curriculum of civic and ethical education. In view of that, a qualitative case study research based on the assumptions of the interpretive/constructivist research paradigm was employed to investigate and understand the issues indicated above. Twelve research participants, from Civic and Ethical Education teachers, principals, non-Civic and Ethical Education teachers and students of the school were selected through a purposeful criterion-based sampling. In the two months time fieldwork, in-depth/unstructured interview, observation and document analysis were used as data gathering mechanisms. Then, the qualitative data was analyzed under three major categories and nine interpretive themes using an adapted five-phase analysis model. Consequently, it was found out that the curriculum of Civic and Ethical Education was in the process of implementation’ with out adequately addressing the required implementation variables. Many of the issues stressed in the curriculum policy of Civic and Ethical Education were not given that much consideration in the implementation process of the subject. Stated in another way, the discrepancy between the rhetoric policy and actual realty of Civic and Ethical Education, in the school studied, was found to be substantial. Thus, practitioners’ efforts in cultivating responsible, committed, ethical and democratic citizens good citizens, was found to be entangled with numerous challenges. Therefore, it has been implied that a concerted work that aimed at clarifying the essence and significance of Civic and Ethical Education, establishing enabling school environments and capacitating school practitioners vis-à-vis the implementation of Civic and Ethical Education be carried out by all concerned bodies.... Although there has been global revitalization of interest for citizenship education, the aspiration of nations to foster desirable societal values on their students has not been adequately materialized Sharma, 2006;Kerr, 1999;Alan and Andrew, 1996. The factors that attributed for this problem were different. ...... In this regard, Alan and Andrew 1996 contend that teachers" passive conception of citizenship, their emphasis on rote learning, their reluctance to deal with controversial public issues, and so forth were major obstacles in the process of fostering societal values through citizenship education. Kerr 1999 also uncovered that schools and teachers manage and implement the curriculum of citizenship education not in line with what they were expected to do. Besides, Gardner, Cairns, and Lawton 2000 explored that teachers were uncomfortable to teach citizenship education, because they felt that citizenship was a value-laden concept and as a result inappropriate to impose on multi-cultural classrooms. ...... There are different approaches/models of Citizenship Education. The general approaches, however, according to Alan and Andrew 1996 and Kerr 1999 are values-explicit and values implicit citizenship education. The values-explicit Citizenship Education emphasizes a major role for education through the school and the formal curriculum. ... Mulugeta Yayeh WorkuCitizenship education is universally recognized as an invaluable approach in building up good citizenship. As a result, it has become the principal concern of the education system of many countries particularly as of the 1990s. In Ethiopia, citizenship education Civics and Ethical Education has embraced a central position in the country’s education system. Nevertheless, many studies conducted on civics and ethical education, both at national and international levels, indicated that the aspiration of nations to buildup good citizens through formal citizenship education has not been satisfactorily achieved due to the prevalence of different problems. One of such problems is the inability of grassroots level practitioners to employ appropriate strategies in the implementation stage of the subject. Hence, this article deals with this problem with the aim of illuminating some important thoughts for its grassroots level practitioners. To that end, strategies that should accompany the teaching learning process of Civics and Ethical Education, both at the classroom and outside the classroom, are fairly dealt with. These include the establishment of democratic school organization and administration, flexible curriculum and timetable, the meaningful involvement of all actors of Civics and Ethical Education, the utilization of democratic, deliberative, participatory and dynamic teaching-learning methods in classrooms and experiential learning whole school events and community service learning outside classrooms.... No task is more important than the development of responsible, effective, and educated citizens Branson, 1998. Citizenship education is broadly formulated covering the process of preparing the younger generation to take on roles and responsibilities as citizens, and in particular, the role of education is included in schooling, teaching, and learning in the process of preparing citizens Kerr, 1999. Based on the above description, research on strengthening the value of honesty through Anticorruption Education in schools is carried out to discuss anti-corruption education that has been implemented by schools, driving factors and inhibiting the application of anticorruption education in schools, and solutions carried out to overcome obstacles in the implementation of anti-corruption education in schools. ...... Good character is the goal to be achieved from Pancasila and Citizenship Education. Concerning the purpose of Pancasila and Citizenship Education who want to form the good character of citizens, then a Pancasila and Citizenship Education teacher is the spearhead of Pancasila and Citizenship Education learning in school must be able to educate values, morals, and character to its learners Kerr, 1999;Lickona, 2009;Patrick & Leming, 2001 The purpose of Pancasila and Citizenship Education is in line with the vision of the school's mission that always applies the values of character education, one of which is the character of honesty. Through Pancasila and Citizenship Education teachers who always prioritize the value of honesty in the school environment, namely being honest in repeats, midterm assessments, and end-of-semester assessments are expected when the learners plunge into the community can maintain the good name of the school. ...... Electing representatives who will change the law or compel observance of the law is insufficient to address the most pressing challenges facing humanity. Problems such as environmental pollution, discrimination of minority groups, respect for diversity, poverty and unemployment require dedicated daily efforts to improve the quality of life of individuals and entire societies Kerr, 1999. At present, citizenship is closely associated with daily activities and the promotion of personal welfare. ...... Citizenship education Kerr, 1999 is conceptualized as a continuum of approaches from a narrow approach through the teaching of civics in content-and knowledge-based fashion to a broader interpretation through citizenship education as active citizenship. The last-mentioned approach is one of the key educational goals for the new century competencies for students Almeida et al., 2017. ...After World War II, Hungary was a Soviet satellite state for decades. 1989 marked the start of a democratic and pluralistic era. In the last decade, as in many of the post-Soviet countries, a new model, so-called illiberal democracy, has emerged in Hungary. This chapter focuses on answering the following questions. How do young Hungarians who were born after the regime change participate in society? Do they follow the passive behaviour patterns of their parents, or are they more open to civic participation? How do they evaluate Hungarian illiberal democracy? Is there any connection between their civic activity and evaluation of democracy? In order to address these questions, young people’s perceptions of the status of democracy are examined based on the V-Dem Report Lührmann et al., 2018 report using key indicators. Their citizenship activity is analysed using the Citizenship Behaviour Questionnaire CBQ. Which comprises four sub-dimensions social, political, action for change and personal activity. A total of 377 students, from different universities, participated in the study. Outcomes reveal the crucial problems of democracy as seen by young Hungarians – the expanding political control over the media and the antidemocratic ways parties try to get more votes. Students seem more interested in semi-active and personal forms of activities than passive citizenship although passive citizenship behaviour is associated with all the democracy dimensions. Students scoring high on passive citizenship statements perceive the status of democracy to be better. Similarly, semi-active citizenship activity negatively correlates with Freedom of Speech and Action, Election Honesty and Democracy in general.... The complex and contested nature of citizenship has led to different ways of approaching it over time. This has also been reflected on how citizenship education has been defined and approached Kerr, 1999;Torney-Purta et al., 1999. ...... On the other hand, leading students through a path of discovery that start from everyday place or situations, allows them to become familiar with the values and principles of the democratic process and to understand the meaning and usefulness of citizenship itself. In doing so, traditional citizenship education give way to an education for/through citizenship» Kerr, 1999;Keating 2009 that aims to equip students with the knowledge, values, and attitudes necessary to effectively participate in the civic sphere, allowing them to be treated as citizens right now, rather than seeing school only as a place of preparation for adulthood. Fondaca's experience reinforces the idea that experiential learning, linked to a precise thematization of citizenship, in which the emphasis is on its daily appliances, could encourage learning processes increasing civic competencies and promoting the development of stances on citizenship. ...The operational guidelines of the National Strategies and the 2030 European Agenda for Sustainable Development towards educational activities underline the importance of fostering creative, inclusive, and positive communities in resilient territories; for an educational action-oriented towards social sustainability development and well-being. In these novel scenarios, care management and educational responsibilities become strategic assets for the future of civil society, capable of supporting the challenges in contrast to the current educational poverty. The generative’ action requires a holistic transdisciplinary intervention conceived in the Deweyan perspective of learning by doing. In this sense, we present the Association of Responsible Adults for a United Territory against Risk ARTUR and its Laboratories for Adolescents and their Needs ARTUR LAB. The ARTUR aims to implement pedagogic interventions to ensure the timing and effectiveness of education in territories at risk of adolescents’ antisocial behaviour. The ARTUR LAB are workshops that guide adolescents to think and act according to ethical and moral society principles. The activities are divided into indoor’ and outdoor’ modules and are built around sports, arts and active citizenship activities, all linked to the 4C risk prevention models Countering, Treating, Coresponsible, Sharing to transform crises into possibilities, poverty into opportunities and to educate adolescents to become responsible adults of tomorrow.... Pengaturan kemitraan tripusat pendidikan diatas menunjukan PPKn bercirikan sosio-pedagogis Kerr, 2000;Winarno, 2014. PKn dalam K13 tidak dipandang berada pada ranah pribadi dan melihat PPKn sebagai kurikulum hanya dapat diajarkan pada ranah formal-pedagogis. ...... Secara konseptual merupakan education for citizenship pendidikan untuk kewarganegaraan. Sebagaimana yang telah disampaikan Kerr 1999Kerr , 2000Kerr , 2002 bahwa peserta didik disiapkan menjadi warga yang dilengkapi kompetensi utuh dan holistik seorang warga yaitu pengetahuan, keterampilan, dan watak kewarganegaraan melalui mata pelajaran PPKn. Sehingga warga muda peserta didik diharapkan nantinya mampu berpartisipasi yang bermutu, terarah, efektif yang didasarkan tanggung jawab, cakap dan well informed saat mereka dewasa sebagaimana tujuan umum PPKn Kerr, 1999Kerr, , 2002Rachman, 2018. ...... School textbooks are a tool for the teachers to promotion of the citizenship Collado & Atxurra, 2006. They consider themselves that the textbooks to sufficient degree provide the theoretical knowledge they need, although they are worried about their dependence on them, their age, the gaps and the issues they deal with Kerr, 1999. Nowadays, they continue to dominate the educational process while teachers envision more discussion with students, time and new educational material Torney-Purta, Lehmann, Oswald, & Schulz, 2001. ...... While important tools are available to the teacher, they remain untapped Huddleston, 2005. Mostly, the textbook satisfies the needs of young teachers due to lack of retraining and new tools, but without a holistic perception of reality as it needs modernization Kerr, 1999. Teachers' dependence on the textbook confirms that citizenship education remains mostly a book-based experience rather than an experiential one Mayer, Bromley, & Ramirez, 2010. ...There is shared commitment across European countries to ensure young people acquire social, civic and intercultural competences, by promoting across the disciplines democratic values and fundamental rights, social inclusion and non-discrimination, as well as active citizenship. However, this raises many challenges, not least in an uncertain world characterized by economic crisis, increased inequality, environmental concern, high migration flows, and the rise of populist post-truth’ politics. All these challenges raise questions of fairness and social justice and prompt reflection on notions related to identity, the development of capabilities, citizenship, belonging, otherness, recognition of diversity, inter-generational solidarity and active democratic participation at the personal, global and policy level. In this context, papers from across the disciplines concerned with democratic values, constructs of identity, human dignity and capacities, participation and/or citizenship education in relation to issues of social justice in formal, in-formal or non-formal contexts are included in this volume.... However, the question "Should Citizenship Education be taught by a specialist or a generalist teacher?" has been one important issue in the field of Citizenship Education Kerr, 1999;Taneja, 1990. Nevertheless, many educators insist that the teaching of Citizenship Education should not be left only for some groups of teachers. ...... Taneja, 1990, p. 231 The experience of many countries in teaching Citizenship Education is also consistent with the idea of Taneja 1990. For instance, as Kerr 1999 reported, in most of the countries he investigated there was no specific initial and in-service training for Civics teachers. For this educator, the general trend was using generalist teachers in teaching the subject. ... Mulugeta Yayeh WorkuThe purpose of this study was to understand the perceptions of Ethiopian students and school practitioners as to whose responsibility it is to foster good citizenship. To achieve this purpose, a descriptive survey design was used. Through different sampling techniques, 42 Civic and Ethical Education teachers, 410 students, 157 non-Civic and Ethical Education teachers, and 29 school leaders were selected from 20 schools. A questionnaire was used to gather data concerning participants’ perceptions on the responsibility of the three major stakeholders of good citizenship traditional institutions the family, community, and religious institutions, educational institutions, and nonacademic institutions NGOs, mass media, and political parties. Results of the study revealed that the perceptions of Ethiopian students and educators regarding the responsibility for good citizenship were narrow and incomplete. It is also understood that there has been much reliance on schools and their Civic and Ethical Education teachers for the preparation of good citizens. In the article, the implications of these findings, both for policymaking and classroom practice, are indicated.... CE should be viewed as a content area for inclusion in the formal school curriculum that has educational value as either a mainstreamed subject area or as an integrated acrossthe-curriculum content opportunity. As a starting point, Kerr 1999 provides a useful definition ...... Given the limits of such a global perspective within an internationalized approach to CE, the need for localizing the teaching and learning of citizenship for Fiji is evident. Kerr 1999 articulates the need for contextualization, explaining that CE is necessarily the child of interpretation. His five pronged criteria for the contextual development of CE in-country includes 1 historical tradition; 2 geographical position; 3 sociopolitical structure; 4 economic system, and 5 global trends ...... Tidak ada tugas yang lebih penting dari pengembangan warga negara yang bertanggung jawab, efektif, dan terdidik Branson, 1998. Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan dirumuskan secara luas mencakup proses penyiapan generasi muda untuk mengambil peran dan tanggung jawab sebagai warga negara, dan secara khusus, peran pendidikan termasuk di dalam persekolahan, pengajaran, dan belajar dalam proses penyiapan warga negara Kerr, 1999. ...... Karakter yang baik merupakan tujuan yang ingin dicapai dari PKn. Berkaitan dengan tujuan PKn yang ingin membentuk karakter baik warga negara, maka seorang guru PPKn merupakan ujung tombak pembelajaran PKn di sekolah harus mampu mendidik nilai, moral, dan karakter kepada peserta didiknya Lickona, 1991;Kerr, 1999;Patrick & Vontz, 2001. ...Alfurkan Alfurkan Marzuki MarzukiThis article aims to describe the form of anti-corruption education to strengthen the value of honesty in schools, factors that encourage and inhibit the implementation of anti-corruption education, as well as solutions to overcome obstacles in the implementation of anti-corruption education. The study uses a qualitative approach with a case study type. Data collection was carried out through interviews, observations, and documentation studies. Data analysis uses interactive analysis. Anti-corruption education is carried out in two ways the honesty canteen and the learning of Pancasila and Citizenship Education. Supporting factors that influence the honesty reinforcement are teacher modeling, increased worship activities, and participation in organizational activities. The inhibiting factor is that canteens often suffer losses due to lack of supervision and teacher assistance. The solution to overcome these obstacles is to increase cooperation between teachers, increase supervision, carry out regular assistance, and support from families and communities.... z tej perspektywy obywatelstwo rozumiano w relacji jednostka-państwo, co oznaczało, że dobry obywatel to osoba, która głosuje, startuje w wyborach lub przynależy do partii politycznych. zmiany społeczne XX wieku, takie jak postęp technologiczny, migracje, zmiana roli kobiety Kerr, 1999, stworzyły zupełnie nowe problemy. zanieczyszczenie środowiska, konflikty, przemoc, bieda, bezrobocie itd. to zjawiska, których rozwiązanie zaczęło się wymykać z rąk polityków i weszło w granice odpowiedzialności jednostek Kerr, 1999. ...... zmiany społeczne XX wieku, takie jak postęp technologiczny, migracje, zmiana roli kobiety Kerr, 1999, stworzyły zupełnie nowe problemy. zanieczyszczenie środowiska, konflikty, przemoc, bieda, bezrobocie itd. to zjawiska, których rozwiązanie zaczęło się wymykać z rąk polityków i weszło w granice odpowiedzialności jednostek Kerr, 1999. Obywatel XXI wieku to osoba, która potrafi w życiu codziennym rozwiązywać nie tylko osobiste problemy, ale także wpływać na postawy innych, na instytucje społeczne, kształtować nastawienia, które służą pozytywnemu rozwiązaniu spraw Davies, Issitt, 2005. ...... Citizenship, cultural conversations, and guidance within the family will contribute to the development of individuals Kerr, 2000;Feldmann, 2007. In their study, Ahmed and ...The general purpose of this study is to examine the views of social studies and classroom teachers on citizenship tendencies and classroom practices. In line with this purpose, teachers' citizenship tendencies, whether citizenship tendencies vary according to gender, branch, and seniority, how they interpret the concept of "ideal citizenship," and classroom practices related to citizenship teaching were investigated. The study was conducted according to mixed method. The results revealed that the citizenship tendencies of the teachers were at a high level. The total mean scores of teachers did not differ according to gender; however, there were significant differences in terms of branch and seniority Findings show that the teachers expressed ideal citizenship as "knowing their rights and responsibilities" and "obeying the laws." While defining the qualities an ideal citizen should have, it was concluded that teachers frequently emphasised the themes of "responsible" and "patriotism." It was concluded that teachers adopted the principle of "learning by doing-experiencing" and the method of "lecturing" while explaining the subject of citizenship. It was also found that "visual media" and "insufficient curriculum" were teachers' most common problems while raising citizens. Teachers made various suggestions about raising ideal citizens.... According to Kerr 1999, Civic Education learning is broadly formulated for the preparation process so that responsibilities as citizens can be taken over. Education teaches and provides experience for students to carry out their rights and obligations properly as citizens. ...Muhammad HalimiRahmat Rahmat Restu Adi NugrahaElda Dwi PratiwiTechnological developments have an impact on various fields, in education particularly, the 21st-century learning requires lectures and learners to be creative and innovative in utilizing digital media effectively, by using the right methods, the learning process in the digital era will be carried out optimally, to improve the quality of learning by learning objectives. This research used a mixed design approach with a survey as its main method. The participants of this study were lecturers and students of the PKn UPI Study Program using online learning in an online learning system SPADA UPI and Integrated Online Learning System SPOT UPI at Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia. The results show that online learning can improve the quality of Civics learning if technology can be integrated into the Civics learning curriculum, lectures who can use digital media and digital literacy, and teaching materials that can develop 21st-century civic competencies to prepare young citizens in facing the era of disruption. Students as young citizens can be directed to master digital citizenship skills so that they can become citizens who have democratic, wise, and responsible competencies in the digital era.... In its development, civics education experienced the change of paradigm which leads to the humanistic paradigm, which views every student as having different characters and potentials Bruna, 2007. Civics education is considered as playing a strategic position considered to have a strategic position in building the character of the citizens in line with their functions Kerr, 1999. Education is carried out democratically and fairly and not discriminatively by highly valuing human rights, diversity values, cultural values, and the plurality of the nation Gorski, 2009. ...Muhammad HendriZamroni ZamroniSuharno Suharnop style="text-align justify;">This research aims to reveal the pattern of the multiculturalism-based civics education at higher education institutions in Surakarta, Indonesia. It applied the descriptive qualitative method with the dual case study approach, conducted at State University of Sebelas Maret and Slamet Riyadi University in Surakarta. The data were collected through observation and interviews to find the answers to the research questions in the field. The data were analysed using the interactive technique, consisting of data collection, data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing. The result shows that the teaching of multiculturalism-based civics education at State University of Sebelas Maret and Slamet Riyadi University has almost the same pattern, that is media-assisted teaching pattern and is always conducted by considering the material integration dimension, knowledge construction dimension, prejudice minimization dimension, equal rights to education dimension, and the dimension of school culture empowerment and social structure from the planning stage to teaching implementation and evaluation stages. The research findings suggest that the students of universities in Surakarta should be able to implement the goal of the teaching of civics education in universities, and the lecturers should always improve the materials, content, method, and strategies of the teaching of multiculturalism-based civics education has become a key concem and area of debate in recent years all around the world. In England citizenship education has been widely reviewed and rapidly developed over the past decade. At the same time China has also come to pay more and more attention to citizenship education in both the national and intemational context. This disseliation firstly intends to review what citizenship has meant inside England and China. Secondly and importantly, I highlight the methodology and methods used in my study and discuss their advantages and disadvantages. Thirdly by comparing policies for citizenship education between England and China I seek to develop a clearer understanding of what differences and similarities have existed in citizenship education in both countries. Fourthly, I investigate approaches to citizenship education in two schools, one in England and one in China, and examine these from the perspective of pupils aged 15 to 17, as elicited through a questionnaire survey can-ied out in each school. Moreover I attempt to analyse the backgrounds for differences and similarities of citizenship education in both countries. Both countries face the challenges of citizenship education and try to overcome limitations and prepare for tomOlTOW's world. So it is useful to look beyond one's own countIy and widen the options open to a different study aims to determine the role of Pancasila in the era of disruption to be an important part that every individual must realize that this era must be passed and become a challenge in current developments. Changes that are increasingly fast are encouraging and requiring us to innovate. The ability to innovate is one strategy in maintaining our existence in this era. The development of this era has an impact on various existing fields, one of which is education. Education is an important aspect which is one of the means to achieve the national goals of the Indonesian nation. The method used is a qualitative descriptive case study research method for elementary school students in South Jakarta. The data source is elementary schools in Pasar Minggu sub-district. The research data is in the form of descriptions of the utterances of several informants who describe the role of Pancasila. The subjects of this study were elementary school students in Pasar Minggu sub-district with the object, namely 50 students and 10 class teachers. The results showed that the role of civic education for elementary school students and learning civics education is fun. Thus, creating a new paradigm even though the times are increasingly rapid, elementary school students still instill character values according to the noble culture of courtesy and ethics. The function of civic education is implemented in a habit of anticipating and overcoming moral crises in elementary school students in South Jakarta.

^{KewarganegaraanRepublik Indonesia diatur dalam UU no. 12 tahun 2006 tentang Kewarganegaraan Republik Indonesia. Menurut UU ini, orang yang menjadi Warga Negara Indonesia (WNI) adalah. 1. setiap orang yang sebelum berlakunya UU tersebut telah menjadi WNI. 2. anak yang lahir dari perkawinan yang sah dari ayah dan ibu WNI.}

CIVIC EDUCATION, CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION Civic Education “…the foundation course work in school designed to prepare young citizens for an active role in their communities in their adult lives”. Citizenship Education or Education for Citizenship “…both these in school experiencess as well as out of school or non formal/informal learning which takes place in the family, the religious organization, community organizations, the media, etc which help to shape the totality of the citizen”. Cogan, 19994 Civic Education adalah suatu mata pelajaran dasar di sekolah yang dirancang untuk mempersiapkan warga negara muda, agar kelak setelah dewasa dapat berperan aktif dalam masyarakat. Sedangkan Citizenship Education atau Education for Citizenship digunakan sebagai istilah yang memiliki pengertian yang lebih luas yang mencakup pengalaman belajar di sekolah dan luar sekolah seperti rumah, organisasi keagamaan, organisasi kemasyarakatan, media massa dan lain-lain yang berperan membantu proses pembentukan totalitas atau keutuhan sebagai warganegara. Karakteristik warganegara abad ke-21 adalah sebagai berikut 1. kemampuan mengenal dan mendekati masalah sebagai warga masyarakat global, 2. kemampuan bekerjasama dengan orang lain dan memikul tanggung jawab atas peran atau kewajibannya dalam masyarakat, 3. kemampuan untuk memahami, menerima, dan menghormati perbedaan-perbedaan budaya 4. kemampuan berpikir kritis dan sistematis. 5 memiliki kepekaan terhadap dan mempertahankan hak asasi manusia seperti hak kaum wanita, minoritas etnis, dsb 6. kemampuan mengubah gaya hidup dan pola makanan pokok yang sudah biasa guna melindungi lingkungan 7. kemampuan menyelesaikan konflik dengan cara damai tanpa kekerasan. 8. kemauan dan kemampuan berpartisipasi dalam kehidupan politik pada tingkatan pemerintahan lokal, nasional, dan internasional. Objek Studi PKn Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan mempunyai objek studi yaitu warga negara dalam hubungannya dengan organisasi kemasyarakatan sosial, ekonomi, agama, kebudayaan, dan negara. Termasuk pula objek studi civics adalah . Tingkah laku warga negara . Tipe pertumbuhan berpikir . Potensi setiap diri warga negara . Hak dan kewajiban . Cita-cita dan aspirasi . Kesadaran patriotism, nasionalisme 7. Usaha, kegiatan, partisipasi, dan tanggungjawab warga negara. Nu’man Somantri, 2001 dalam Aziz & Sapriya 2011316, serta wuryan, 200614 Pendidkan Kewarganegaraan yang mengkaji tentang budaya yaitu civic culture. Menurut Winataputra 201257 Spesifik civic culture merupakan budaya yang menopang kewarganegaraan yang berisikan separangkat ide-ide yang dapat diwujudkan secara efektif dalam representasi kebudayaan untuk tujuan pembentukan identitas warganegara. Dalam hal ini, civic culture sangat diperlukan dalam pengembangan Pendidikan kewarganegaraan. selain dari pada itu, winataputra 200658 menyatakan bahwa identitas warganegara yang bersumber dari civic culture perlu dikembangkan melalui pendidikan Kewarganegaraan dalam berbagai bentuk dan latar belakang. Tujuannya hanya ingin mensosialisasikan perbedaan dari kedua konsep ini semoga bermanfaat dan sedikit mengkaji tentang Objek Studi PKn oleh Prof, Numan Sumantri, seorang bpk PKn yang sangat senior.

kepustakaanasing disebut dengan istilah social studies, social education, citizenship education, dan social science education. Pendidikan IPS adalah suatu bidang studi yang mempelajari, menelaah dan menganalisis gejala dan masalah sosial di masyarakat di tinjau dari berbagai aspek kehidupan secara terpadu (Sapriya, dkk. SEORANG PENGGUNA TELAH BERTANYA 👇 Jelaskan perbedaan antara civic, civics, dan citizen ? INI JAWABAN TERBAIK 👇 . Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan Ilmu Kewarganegaraan Cheresore dalam Budimansyah, D dan Suryadi, K 20082 mendefinisikan Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan sebagai Ilmu Kewarganegaraan atau Citizenship yang isinya mempelajari hubungan antara individu dan individu dengan Negara. Dalam hal ini individu adalah warga negara, sehingga pendidikan kewarganegaraan mempelajari hubungan antara warga negara dengan negara. Kewarganegaraan dalam bahasa latin disebut “CIVIS”, setelah kata “CIVIS” dalam bahasa Inggris disebut “Civic”, yang berarti kewarganegaraan atau kewarganegaraan. Dari kata kewarganegaraan lahir kata civic science of citizenship, civic education dan citizen education Darmadi, 2010 7 Perkembangan studi pendidikan kewarganegaraan tidak lepas dari sejarah perkembangan Amerika Serikat United States of America. Pendidikan kewarganegaraan diperkenalkan di Amerika Serikat pada tahun 1790 dalam rangka Amerikanisasi bangsa Amerika atau yang dikenal dengan “teori Amerikanisasi” Darmadi, 2010 7 hal ini disebabkan keragaman warga Amerika yang berasal dari berbagai bangsa yang datang ke Amerika Serikat. Amerika Serikat untuk memiliki identitas sebagai orang Amerika. Untuk mengubah orang-orang dari berbagai negara menjadi orang Amerika, pendidikan kewarganegaraan diajarkan kepada warga negara Amerika. Saat itu, isu-isu pemerintahan, hak dan kewajiban kewarganegaraan dan kewarganegaraan dibahas sebagai bagian dari ilmu politik. Darmadi, 2010 8 2. Pendidikan kewarganegaraan citizenship education Mahoney dalam Budimansyah, D dan Surayadi K. 2008 menjelaskan bahwa pendidikan kewarganegaraan adalah proses pembelajaran semua mata pelajaran, kegiatan siswa, proses administrasi dan pelatihan dalam upaya mengembangkan perilaku kewarganegaraan yang baik. Azyumardi Azra dalam Darmadi 242010 Rumusan Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan meliputi sebuah. Pemahaman dasar tentang bagaimana demokrasi dan lembaga-lembaganya bekerja. B. Pemahaman tentang “aturan hukum” dan hak asasi manusia yang tercermin dalam perumusan perjanjian dan kesepakatan internasional dan lokal C. Memperkuat keterampilan partisipasi yang akan memberdayakan siswa untuk merespon dan memecahkan masalah masyarakat secara demokratis. D. Pengembangan budaya demokrasi dan perdamaian di lembaga pendidikan dan semua aspek kehidupan masyarakat. 3. Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan / Kewarganegaraan[s] Pendidikan Pendidikan untuk warga negara Menulis istilah sipil[s] Pendidikan melalui penggunaan huruf s di belakang kata kewarganegaraan merupakan istilah yang digunakan oleh para ahli untuk menyebut Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan Wahab, Abdul Azis dan Sapriya, 322011, sehingga penting untuk mengetahui cara penulisan istilah ini untuk itu. tidak ada kesalahan dalam penulisan istilah. . Cogan dan Deriicot dalam Wahab, Abdul Aziz dan Sapriya 322011 menjelaskan pengertian Kewarganegaraan, Kewarganegaraan, dan Pendidikan kewarganegaraan secara utuh warga negara didefinisikan sebagai anggota konstituen masyarakat. Kewarganegaraan, di sisi lain, dikatakan sebagai seperangkat karakteristik menjadi warga negara. Dan terakhir, Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan, poros yang mendasari sebuah studi, didefinisikan sebagai kontribusi pendidikan terhadap pengembangan karakteristik tersebut.

Halini secara konseptual dan teoritik sejak tahun 1994 telah diajukan oleh Center for Civic Education dalam National Standards for Civics and Government (Branson,1998) Dengan demikian terdapat beberapa keharusan dan tuntutan terhadap Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan dalam mengembangkan kompetensi kewarganegaraan di era global, baik

67% found this document useful 3 votes6K views16 pagesCopyright© © All Rights ReservedAvailable FormatsDOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdShare this documentDid you find this document useful?67% found this document useful 3 votes6K views16 pagesPerbedaan Civic Education Dengan Citizenship EducationJump to Page You are on page 1of 16 You're Reading a Free Preview Pages 6 to 14 are not shown in this preview. Reward Your CuriosityEverything you want to Anywhere. Any Commitment. Cancel anytime. BIODIK Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Biologi facilitates a scientific forum for exchanging ideas to enrich the theory, policy, and practice of Biology education.BIODIK publishes high quality, original, and open access articles in Biology Education; qualitative, quantitative and mix method. BIODIK is quarterly published in March, June, september and december by Biology Education CIVICS, CIVIC EDUCATION, DAN CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION 1. Civics Ilmu Kewarganegaraan Cheresore dalam Budimansyah, D dan Suryadi, K 20082 mengartikan Civics Sebagai the Science of citizhenship atau Ilmu Kewarganegaraan yang isinya mempelajari hubungan antara individu dan individu dan Negara. Dalam hal ini individu itu sebagai warga negara sehingga civics memepelajari tentang hubungan antara warga negara dan negara. Kewarganegaraan dalam Bahasa Latin disebut “CIVIS” selanjutanya dari kata “CIVIS” dalam bahasa inggris disebut “Civic” artinya mengenai warga negara atau kewarganegaraan. Dari kata Civic ini lahirlah kata Civics Ilmu kewarganegaraan, Civic Education dan Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan Darmadi,20107 Perkembangan kajian mengenai civics tidak lepas dari sejarah perkembangan negara USA United State of Anerika/ Amerika Serikat. Civics mulaidiperkenalkan di Amerika Serikat pada tahun 1790 dalam rangka mengamerikakan bangsa Amerika atau yang terkenal dengan nama “theory of Americanization” Darmadi,20107 hal ini dikarenakan keberagaman bangsa Amerika yang berasal dari berbagai bangsa yang dating ke Amerika Serikat agar memiliki satu indentitas sebagai bangsa Amerika. Untuk menjadikan orang-orang yang berasal dari berbagai bangsa ini menjadi bangsa Amerika maka diajarkan Civics bagi warga negara Amerika. pada masa tersebut membicarakan masalah government, hak dan kewajiban warga negara dan civics bagian dari ilmu politik. Darmadi, 20108 2. Civic Education Pendidikan Kewaranegaraan Mahoney dalam Budimansyah, D dan Surayadi K. 2008 menjelaskan civic Education merupakan suatu proses pembelajaran semua mata pelajaran, kegiatan siswa, proses adminsitrasi dan pembinaan dalam upaya mengembangkan perilaku warga negara yang baik. Azyumardi Azra dalam Darmadi 242010 Rumusan Civic Education mencakup a. Pemahaman dasar tentang cara kerja demokrasi dan lembaga-lembaganya b. Pemahan tentang “rule of law” dan Hak Asasi Manusia seperti tercermin dalam rumusan-rumusan perjanjian dan kesepakatan internasional dan local c. Penguatan ketrampilan partisipasi yang akan memperdayakan peserta didik untuk merespons dan memecahkan masalah-masalah masyarakat secara demokratis. d. Pengembangan budaya demokrasi dan perdamaian pada lembaga-lembaga pendidikan dan seluruh aspek kehidupan masyarakat. 3. Citizenship Education/Civic[s] Education Pendidikan bagi Warga Negara Penulisan istilah Civic[s] Education dengan menggunakan huruf s di belakang kata civic merupakan istilah yang digunakan para ahli untuk menyebutkan Citizenship Education, Wahab, Abdul Azis dan Sapriya, 322011 oleh karena itu penulisan istilah ini penting untuk diketahui agar tidak terjadi kesalahan penulisan istilah. Cogan dan Deriicot dalam Wahab, Abdul Aziz dan Sapriya 322011 menjelaskana mengenai pengertian lengkap mengenai Citizen, Citizenship dan Citizenship Education A Citizen was defined as a constituent member of society. Citizenship on the other hand, was said to be a set of characteristic of being a citizen. And finally, Citizenship Education the underlying focal point of a study, was defined as the contribution of education to the development of those characteristic. .

cr395rbdat.pages.dev/43

cr395rbdat.pages.dev/282

cr395rbdat.pages.dev/188

cr395rbdat.pages.dev/122

cr395rbdat.pages.dev/302

cr395rbdat.pages.dev/247

cr395rbdat.pages.dev/267

cr395rbdat.pages.dev/257

cr395rbdat.pages.dev/193

perbedaan civic education dan citizenship education