|
"IN THIS LIFE WE WANT NOTHING BUT FACTS, SIR
NOTHING BUT FACTS!"
A DEMOCRATIC RESPONSE
By Derry HANNAM
English School Inspector and adviser for the Council of Europe
in Education for Democratic Citizenship
Learning about democracy and citizenship when I was at school was
a bit like reading holiday brochures in prison. Unless you were
about to be let out or escape it was quite frustrating and seemed
pointless. The English school system was firmly in the control of
Mr. Gradgrind, the awesomely awful creation of Charles Dickens in
«Hard Times» who I quote in the title of this talk.
Fortunately this is no longer true of all schools and is much less
true in some countries than others though at times I feel that he
is alive and well in my country. Research in several countries tells
us clearly that courses about politics and government that consist
of no more than lectures from teachers are often experienced as
very boring by students (Verba et al. 1995).
I am sure that in your company I do not need to argue that schools
can and should be democratic places if they are to educate effectively
for democracy or to motivate students to take responsibility for
their own learning - one of the major aims of the Norwegian Reform
94 program. To be effectively educated for democracy means being
able to BE a democratic citizen. It means knowing how to DO democracy
and not just knowing about it or passing written examinations. It
involves gaining experience in making choices and decisions, individually
and collectively, that have real «practical consequences»
where «... learning and experience must be welded together...»
- to quote from your impressive Core Curriculum document. (Nat.
Centre for Educational Resources, 1994).
I did not enjoy school much. I have never liked being told what
to do. I don't like telling other people what to do. So why
did I become a teacher? Well I absolutely loved history as a child.
Especially the history of transport networks - canals, railways,
aviation. In some aspects of history I knew that I knew more detail
than my teachers even though I did not always understand its wider
significance. But they were not usually interested in what I knew
or what I wanted to learn. I was especially irritated when they
said things that I thought were not accurate but were not interested,
in fact became angry, when I tried to correct them. I was probably
a total pain in the neck. But it was to some extent school that
made me a subversive pain in the neck to my teachers. I wanted to
be an enthusiastic learner. The teachers could not accept that they
might learn something from me, that I and my friends might know
something useful to the class - that teachers and pupils/students
could learn together and from each other. That all should be citizens
with rights and responsibilities in the learning democracy.
I became a teacher because I wanted to do things in a different
way. Having read your Reform 94 student's «Guide»
(Nat. Centre for Educational Resources, 1994) I half wish that I
had been born a few years later in Norway! All yesterday I bored
conference participants with the question «Does the reality
of your Upper Secondary School match the beautiful thinking of the
Norwegian «Core Curriculum» and «The Guide».
I will go on boring you with it today.
By the way the words «pupil» and «student»
are a bit of a problem in English! In the United States all young
learners in any kind of institution are students. In England until
quite recently we called anyone at school a pupil. A student was
someone at university. This is similar to French (eleve and etudiant)
or German (schuler and student).
More recently some secondary schools in England have started to
call their pupils students. In my view a pupil is one who needs
to be taught while a student can think and learn more for themselves.
This is not always how English secondary schools treat young people
even though they call them students!
Demos in Greek means «people» and «kratia»
means «authority» or «government.» So democracy
is the government of the people by the people. Authority or power
is shared amongst the citizens who have equal rights and responsibilities
as members of the democracy. If they elect representatives to speak
for them then they can remove these representatives if they stop
speaking for them. In ancient Athens where it all began not everyone
was a citizen. Women, children and slaves could not speak or vote.
Things have improved in Europe for women and slaves but the period
of dependency that begins with childhood gets longer and longer
as full-time education of the young is extended. Over two thousand
years ago Alexander the Great was king of Macedonia by the time
he was twenty and had conquered most of the world as he knew it
before most of you will have finished at university. This seemingly
endless delay in becoming a full member of society is problematic
for young people today I think and makes it all the more important
that you should be fully involved in the decision making processes
of your schools and wider communities.
It is crazy to expect human beings to be passive at the very time
in their lives when their metabolisms are most active. We should
not be surprised at the increasing incidence of psychiatric illness
amongst young people if society treats you in this way. The problem
is even worse in my country for the significant minority of young
people who feel that they are failures at school and who too often
dropout to become the criminalised underclass. Their difficulties
and their sense of alienation are of course even greater if they
come from minority ethnic communities. This is much less of a problem
here in Norway where 90% of 16-19 year-olds are following an upper
secondary course.
As a teacher I always tried to share power with my students as
far as my responsibilities allowed. I did so for four reasons:
* Firstly: I believed it was their human right - now set out in
Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the
Child. I was surprised to find little reference to human rights
in the students «Guide». The core curriculum document
on the other hand makes the powerful statement in the section on
the «Spiritual Human Being» that «Education should
develop resolve to assert one's rights and those of others and to
stand up against their violation». It refers to «...
equality, human rights and rationality...» in its opening
section on Values.
* Secondly: I believed my students would learn many things from
the experience that could not be learned from me lecturing them
- perhaps most importantly the skills and attitudes necessary for
democratic citizenship. The courage and confidence to participate
- to speak out for their own rights and the rights of others. To
recognise that minorities also have rights. To be able to negotiate.
To listen and be tolerant of the ideas of others. To be able to
make good rules/laws and if necessary to enforce them. To collaborate,
compromise and make decisions. To take responsibility for those
decisions and change them in the light of experience. To deal with
money and budgets.
* Thirdly: I hoped that if students had some control over what
they learned and as much as possible control over how they learned
it they would learn how to learn and to love learning. They would
develop «motivation through ownership» to use the jargon,
and would learn more effectively if allowed to find their own individual
styles. Sharing control over what students learn has become progressively
more problematic in recent years in England as the content of the
curriculum has become more and more centrally prescribed by government
in a national curriculum.
Creativity and initiative have been taken away from teachers so
that they cannot share these decisions with their students even
if they want to. Centrally controlled testing and inspection ensure
that they don't. I want to discover to what extent your national
curriculum imposes such pressures on your teachers. I am very impressed
by the emphasis in your core curriculum and in your students «Guide»
on the importance of students negotiating with teachers and making
decisions as a class as to how learning will be organised and what
targets will be set. More than this you are expected to participate
in assessment, evaluation, and review, adjusting future plans accordingly.
This all sounds great to me but I am intrigued to know to what degree
the actual content is imposed and whether this to any extent undermines
the actual democracy of the learning processes. Your core curriculum
talks often of the need for students to be interested if they are
to learn. The «Guide» says that «Working on something
that you are interested in is fun, which makes it easier to master
new material». True enough - but to what extent does the curriculum
content offer choices that allow such interests and experiences
to be followed and deepened? Is most of what you are expected to
learn dictated by nationally prescribed progammes and syllabuses
with examinations at the end?
There seems to be a hint in the section of the Core Curriculum
on teaching ability that good teachers «... determine by their
manner whether pupils interest is maintained...», regardless
of whether students are intrinsically interested in what the curriculum
prescribes. This seems to be placing a very heavy burden on your
teachers. Envious trainee teachers used to say to me in my more
energetic classroom days (probably fishing for a good grade), «Derry
you could get the class to learn the telephone directory».
This was of course no guarantee that the telephone directory was
worth learning even if their comment was true - which I doubt, as
I hope that my students would have been sufficiently critically
aware to laugh at me or go to sleep or do something else more worthwhile
than listen to lists of names and numbers.
In fact I am in sympathy with almost everything in your core curriculum.
For me it has real value. In my opinion it is not the telephone
directory. But what if some students feel that some of it is? Even
outstanding teachers will only to some extent be able to change
their minds. We should not assume that only stupid or lazy students
will regard parts of any curriculum as a waste of time. They may
in fact be intelligent and courageous - qualities we wish to encourage!
They may, heaven forbid, even be right!! I am more and more coming
to the view that however important we adults believe it to be that
young people should learn certain things, it is at least equally
important for students to have the time and the facilities to follow
their own interests, to ask their own questions and converse at
length with each other in searching for answers, to use their teachers
as resources if they so choose, as well as to seek the answers to
questions posed by the curriculum and the teachers. Knowledge is
expanding exponentially. It is not uncommon these days for students
to know more than their teachers about aspects and even the implications
of information technology/computers. I think we teachers have got
to accept handing over some curriculum time to the questions and
interests of the students not just to encourage motivation, but
also because it is at least possible that the students will be identifying
some questions that will turn out to more important, at least to
the individuals concerned, than some of those identified as important
by us teachers.
* Fourthly: I quickly learned that the class or the school became
a nicer place to be when the students ideas were taken seriously.
Nicer physically as the environment became more interesting and
better cared for (Titman 1995), and nicer psychologically as relationships
between adults and students and between students themselves became
more open and honest. The administration and management of the school
became more effective and efficient with less time and money wasted
repairing things or investigating problems. Both the Core Curriculum
and the «Guide» have a lot to say about this and I am
sure that they are absolutely right. I think that the sections on
class and student councils, the art of being a representative and
how to chair a meeting are all excellent and I intend to recommend
that we should create something similar in England at the next meeting
of our government's citizenship education advisory group. I look
forward to discovering what you think of these sections of «The
Guide».
There was also a fifth reason which is perhaps the real source
of my motivation. It was more fun to be democratic! Though some
other teachers did not always agree with me!!!
I am a little embarrassed standing in front of you giving a «keynote
speech» partly because it is horrible to feel that you might
be very boring but mainly because I don't think there is any
such thing as an expert in how to make schools more democratic.
The knowledge is only just beginning to exist. I hope that we will
both share and also create some of it. New knowledge will have to
be created in each country around its own unique traditions and
recreated in every school around its unique community experiences
and problems It then has to be recreated in every learning community
or class within every school.
What I am sure about is that the process has begun and that
it will continue. For two reasons, one political the other economic:
Firstly the political reason: Almost every country in the world
now claims to be a democracy. In nearly all these democracies, even
in Norway perhaps, politicians are worried that young people are
becoming alienated from political processes (Crewe et. al. 1996,
Weber 1998). Where they take an interest in social or environmental
issues it is often not through national political parties but through
single-issue pressure groups such as Greenpeace or Amnesty International.
Fewer eighteen to twenty five year olds bother to vote in elections
in many countries. Politicians feel that young people don't
like or trust them enough - poor things!!
There are growing problems of nationalism, racism and xenophobia
threatening to political stability in many countries as we are seeing
now with Haider and his far-right Freedom Movement in Austria. Research
projects have been set up to find out more about the problems of
citizenship and young people. All of them are finding that to be
effective education for democratic citizenship must be experiential
giving young people the right to participate in school decision
making. To experience being a citizen in the mini-society of the
school as your Norwegian Core Curriculum puts it. This means that
many schools in many countries have to change. Any of yours I wonder?
Most countries in Europe, as in Norway, have laws that require structures
to exist in schools to give students a voice - sadly not in England.
Half of our secondary schools do choose to have student councils
(Baginsky and Hannam 1999) and in over half of these the students
do not regard them as effective. Many countries have organisations
of school students like yours or GLO in Denmark that are supported
and consulted by governments - sadly not in England. Many of these
are linked through OBESSU - again, sadly, not England though things
might be about to change...
The IBE/UNESCO research in 17 countries concluded:
One single structure that appears to be most influential in a variety
of dimensions of citizenship preparedness is the existence of and
participation in a students council. The simple existence of a students
council at the school level seems associated with higher participation
in other school activities, and seems to encourage positive attitudes
towards political pluralism. For those directly involved in managing
the students councils, the impact appears to be even more important;
they attain higher levels of positive attitudes towards civic tolerance
and political pluralism and tend to be more involved in out-of-school
activities. (Albela-Bertrand, 1997)
Is this true of Student Councils in Norway would you say?
The even bigger project of the IEA (International Association for
the Evaluation of Educational Achievement) in 24 countries concluded
at the end of its first phase last year -
* Civic education should be cross-diciplinary, participative, interactive,
related to life, conducted in a non-authoritarian environment.
* There is often a dichotomy between what is learned about democracy
and the reality in school and the classroom.
* There is a gap between the learned factual knowledge and the
meaningfulness to the students.
* In many countries teachers are afraid to tackle controversial
issues, have difficulty in changing their pedagogical approach,
and feel uncertain in multidisciplinary content matter. (Torney-Purta,
et al 1999)
Does any of this apply to Norwegian upper secondary schools?
The Council of Europe «Education for Democratic Citizenship»
project which ends this year stresses the importance of students
participating in decision making in schools (Council of Europe 1998).
When the foreign ministers of the member states met in Budapest
in May to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the Council they
included as a key issue in their declaration the importance of «learning
democracy in school and university life, including participation
in decision making and the associated structures of pupils, students
and teachers». (Council of Europe 1999) So my first reason
for optimism is that politicians say that they want young people
to participate more in schools.
The second reason is economy:. No one disputes that literacy and
numeracy - reading, writing and mathematics - are important. But
- in many countries employers, especially in the hi-tech information
and computing industries, are beginning to say that they want young
people who can think creatively, identify their own questions and
problems, draw information from many places and make sense of it,
work collaboratively in seeking new solutions and communicate them
effectively to others (Baylis et. al., 1999 and Seltzer and Bentley,
1999). These are the skills that can come from active participation
in school and class decision making !! They are not learned from
listening to teachers talk, making notes and learning the answers
for questions asked by others in examinations!
It is interesting that Bill Gates of Microsoft, the wealthiest
individual in the world, took study leave after one year of boredom
at Harvard University and never returned. There are many similar
examples: Mr. Ricardo Semler of Semco in Brazil (Semler, 1992),
Richard Branson of Virgin or Anita Roddick of Body Shop in my country.
All call for education that is active and creative and involved
in the real world. The need for lifelong learning is now obvious.
Few people will have only one career in this century that has just
begun and those who do will need to retrain several or many times.
It is crucial that we learn how to learn in school. That we leave
school with confidence in ourselves as learners and creators of
new knowledge. I am afraid that many young people in England do
not feel that their school experience has set them up for life in
this way. How about you?
However it gives me some hope for the future that the skills needed
by business are the same skills needed to make democracy work. There
is little demand anymore for obedient workers to do repetitive work
in factories. Some schools and some school systems have woken up
to this more than others. I often quote Norway as one of the more
awake and aware systems in Europe - am I right do you think?!
I sometimes hear it said that these days the world is run by multinational
corporations so there is no future for democracy. I don't agree.
We had an example recently where my government was pressured by
the agricultural chemical industry, particularly Monsanto supported
by the government of the USA, to allow genetically modified crops
to be grown in the UK. These would have infertile seeds so that
farmers would have to buy more seed from Monsanto every year.
Using the Internet thousands of people quickly learned that other
governments such as that of Switzerland had banned these crops.
They forced supermarkets to label the foods that contained them.
The supermarkets then stopped buying the crops and now the value
of Monsanto shares has collapsed forcing the company to sell its
agrochemical division which is actually now worthless! That's economic
democracy in action folks!! It required information, organisation,
determination, collaboration and self-confidence...
So there is lots of high level support for the idea of student
participation in schools. There are lots of encouraging words. But
what about reality? How much have schools changed since I was a
reluctant school student? Where school students are participating
are they actually making decisions, are they sharing in making decisions,
are they being consulted by others who make the decisions, if they
are consulted are their opinions really listened to? As I have said
I am really looking forward to learning from you on this.
Where there is student participation in England it seems to
fall into three types:
The most usual and the least threatening to teachers is the extracurricular
area. Organising clubs, trips, visits, expeditions, discos, bands,
raising money for charities, helping people in the community such
as the very old or the very young. These may be managed by elected
student councils or by ad-hoc groups. They may have an official
budget or they may have to raise their own money. They can add a
tremendous amount to the school experience of some students and
may give opportunities for a few to meet with teachers and parents
organisations, the school board or governors as we call them in
England, and community groups. In a few schools ways are found to
inform and discuss issues with all students.
The second way that I see students becoming involved is in what
could be called administrative matters. In many European countries
students are elected to the school governing body, council or board
- though not in England. In some schools ways are found to inform
and discuss issues with all students and not just the few members
of the students council., Issues include such things as the catering
arrangements, the care for and improvement of the school environment,
the management of the school library, setting up systems to help
students who are being victimised or bullied. In England where most
schools make students wear uniform they may have a say in changing
it - though almost never in abolishing it which is what many would
like to do. Sometimes, but less often, students share in decisions
about the organisation of the school day and the length of lessons.
Sometimes student councils are involved in making the school development
plan.
In some schools students may be involved in making the laws or
rules for the school, usually for the students but sometimes for
everybody including the teachers. Sometimes the opinions of students
are included in the appointment of new teachers including head teachers.
A recent European Commission project on school self-evaluation involving
over 100 schools from all the countries of the EU found that the
process was most effective when students were seriously involved
(MacBeath, et. al., 1999) Though I must say that I get a bit annoyed
when I read that teachers were surprised «... that the pupils
were so serious and useful in the project». Why on earth is
this surprising? What I found surprising was that this was said
by a Norwegian teacher!
The third area for student involvement is the curriculum - what
is taught and how, and what is (or isn't) learned in classroom
lessons. This is the area where there has been least progress in
England. Yet it involves all students and is supposed to be the
most important function of schools. Students will either become
excited about learning or, as is too often the case, will see no
point in much of it and may be put off learning for a long time
- perhaps for ever. In most countries it is in this area of classroom
practice that teachers feel most threatened by student democracy
and are most resistant to the idea. They believe they are the experts
and should have the authority.
The Nordic countries seem to be the most progressive. Teachers
in England are amazed when I tell them that in Denmark the law requires
teachers in the Folkeskole (Primary school) to discuss and plan
class projects with the students. In Sweden section 2.2 of the 1996
Education Act requires teachers to «show respect for the individual
pupil and organise daily work in democratic ways». They are
especially amazed when I show them the Norwegian upper secondary
school students «Guide» which actually expects the student
council to discuss learning and assessment in the school and not
just the colour of the toilet paper! (Nat. Centre for Educational
Resources, 1994) Students are told that they should take part in
discussions that evaluate the learning environment of the classroom
and the school, including having the right to constructively criticise
teachers if necessary.
Does it really happen? Are you able to make constructive use of
these freedoms in your schools. Are the majority of your fellow
students active in such discussions or do they leave it to the few
to speak for them? I have met Norwegian teachers who are anxious
about the new powers given to students - does this mean that the
reforms are effective or the opposite? Anyway, I am very impressed
by them. They make me feel that it is probably no coincidence that
a recent Amnesty league table of the human rights records of different
countries puts Norway, Denmark and Finland in the top category of
having virtually no significant incidents of abuse. My country come
quite a bit further down the list unfortunately.
In a similar fashion to the ideas in your «Guide» there
have been experiments in the United States with «after-class
groups» of students who stay behind after the lesson to evaluate
it with the teacher and together plan the next one (Shor 1996).
This is an important step in democratising the curriculum. Students
negotiate what will be studied and how from options offered by the
teachers and share in the evaluation and future planning. The step
after that is for the students to create the options of course...
Some successful attempts to create a democratic curriculum have
taken place in areas of social deprivation in the United States
where projects have been built around the real-life questions and
problems identified by the students, their parents and their communities
(Apple and Beane 1999). Groups of students work collaboratively
with each other and the teachers. Some projects bring about real
change in the local communities. Assessment is not just by the teacher
or outside examiners but includes other students, experts from the
community and even parents. This changes the power relations between
teachers and students.
I have visited a number of what are usually called «alternative»
schools around the world. In some students can choose whether to
attend lessons or not and marks or grades are only given when the
students ask for them. Others where the students, sometimes in mixed
age groups, can negotiate with teachers for courses to be created.
Others where there are spaces for private study and students construct
their own timetable or schedule. Others where students spend most
of their time learning outside the school. And just two schools
where the whole school meeting of all staff and students decide
together which teachers of which subjects are required for the following
year and for how many hours based on the interests of the students.
One of these two schools, Sands School in England, is actually
owned collectively by the sixty-five students who attend it. I only
know of one school that was actually started by students - not far
from here.
The Forsoksgymnaset here in Oslo which began in 1966 and is I believe
still controlled by a student majority on its school council or
governing body. I have met FGO students and teachers at conferences
in other countries and been very impressed and read a good deal
about the school. (Oygarden and Svartdal 1979).
It is difficult to be creative and imaginatively democratic with
the curriculum where there is detailed central control of what will
be studied such as exists in England or France. But even here some
things are possible. I have recently been in a school in Solihull,
England where the teachers offer the students the opportunity for
small groups to choose topics that interest them in the A level
history, politics, and sociology courses. Each small group prepares
and teaches some lessons on their special topic. The teacher is
available as an adviser when required. Interestingly the students
never miss lessons that are taught by other students. Essays are
assessed by the student teachers and the teacher together. Is this
how things work in your upper secondary schools? Another big state
school in Wiltshire, England is experimenting with students choosing
their teacher in some subjects.
The big question of all my research into democratic schooling is
of course: Does It Work?
Well, the research evidence really does suggest that when schools
work more democratically:
* Students have a more positive attitude to learning in school
(Alderson, 1999) and to themselves as effective learners after they
leave school;
* That in democratic schools interracial friendships are more common
(Conway et. al. 1993);
* That there is less pressure against studious students because
there is more tolerance of difference and respect for individual
rights (Zalaznik 1980),
* That fewer students are excluded for antisocial or rebellious
behaviour because there is less of it as schools become safer and
less violent places (Davies 1998),
* That ex-students are more successful in their lives not just
in gaining employment or starting their own businesses but also
in making lasting relationships and avoiding criminality (Shweinhart
et. al., 1993).
Yes, we can say that democracy works in schools when it is allowed
to happen. So why doesn't it happen more often I often ask
myself in England? The answers lie somewhere in the training and
attitudes of teachers, the actual behaviour of politicians, the
anxieties of parents - and also, dare I say it, the conditioned
expectations of many students to be told what to do. However I meet
more and more young people who struggle, sometimes without much
success, to make sense of and find meaning in the school curriculum
they are given.
More and more often I hear the question "why do I need to
learn this?"There is a dangerous tendency for older human beings
to hold on to the past when they feel threatened by new events -
especially those who have power. And yet we are a learning species
capable of successfully adapting to new environments. We are a creative,
curious and collaborative species - or we would not be here today!
I am really optimistic that the collaborative democratic school,
although currently experiencing birth pains, will be the model for
the new century.
Thank you for listening.
References
Abela-Bertrand, L.(1997) What Education for What Citizenship? Geneva:UNESCO-IBE
Alderson, P. (1999) Citizenship in Theory or Practice: Being or
Becoming Citizens with Rights. Paper presented at the Conference
on Citizenship at the London Institute of Education, 8 July 1999
Apple, M., and Beane, J.A. (1999) Democratic Schools: Lessons from
the Chalk Face. Buckingham:Open University Press
Baginsky, M., and Hannam, D, (1999) Report on School Councils in
England London: NSPCC
Bayliss,V. et al. (1999) Opening Minds. Education for the 21st Century.
London. RSA
Bluml, K. (1997) Feedback Form for Teachers: The Students Form Vienna.
Vienna School Board
Conway, A., Damico, A., and Damico, S. (1993) Facing Up to Multiculturalism:
Means as Ends in Democratic Education. Paper for international conference
on Education for Democracy, Jerusalem June 6-10, 1993
Council of Europe (1998) Education for Democratic Citizenship Project:
Examples of Good Practice in Member States. DECS/CIT(98) 20 bil.
Strasbourg: Council of Europe
Council of Europe (1999) Declaration and Programme on Education
for Democratic Citizenship, Based on the Rights and Responsibilities
of Citizens. Appendix 5 to the draft minutes of the 104th sitting
of the committee of ministers of the Council of Europe held on 7
May 1999 in Budapest. Doc.No. CM (99) PV1 prov. Strasbourg: Council
of Europe
Crewe, I., Searing, D., and Conover, P. (1996) Citizenship and Civic
Education. London:The Citizenship Foundation
Davies, L., (1998) School Councils and Pupil Exclusions. Birmingham:
The University of Birmingham
Hannam, D. (1998) Democratic Education and Education for Democracy
through Student Participation in Decision Making in Schools. In
Christie, D and Maitles, H.(Eds.) (1999) Values Education for Democracy
and Citizenship. Glasgow: University of Strathclyde
Hannam, D. (1999) Schools for Democracy: From Rhetoric to Reality
Connect:Journal of Youth Research Centre, University of Melbourne,
Australia No.118 August 1999 pp 4-9
MacBeath, J., Jakobsen, L., Meurat, D., and Schratz, M.(1999) Evaluating
Quality in School Education. Brussels:DG XXII European Commission
National Centre for Educational Resources (1994) The Guide. Oslo:
Nat. Centre for Ed. Resources
Newman, F., and Holzman, L. (1993) Lev Vygotsky - Revolutionary
Scientist. London:Routledge
Osborn, M., (1999) Life in School: Pupil Perspectives and Pupil
Experience of Schooling in Three European Countries. Paper presented
at the European Conference on Educational Research, Lahti, Finland
22-25 September 1999
Oygarden, S. and Svartdal, O. (1979) The Forsoksgymnaset, Oslo in
The Perspective of Lifelong Learning Hamburg: UNESCO Institute for
Education
PEG - Participation in Education Group (1997) Schools Can Seriously
Damage Your Health. Newcastle: Newcastle Upon Tyne City Health NHS
Trust
PEG - Participation in Education Group (1998) Everyone Needs Education
for Participation Newcastle,
England:Newcastle City Council
:Schweinhart, L., and Weikart, D. (1993) A Summary of significant
benefits: The High/Scope Preschool Study Through Age 27. Michigan::High/Scope
Educational Foundation
Seltzer, K. and Bentley, T. (1999) The Creative Age: Knowledge and
Skills for the New Economy. London:DEMOS
Semler, R. (1992) Maverick, London:Century
Shor, I., (1996) When Students Have Power:Negotiating Authority
in a Critical Pedagogy Chicago:University of Chicago Press
Sizer, T. (1986) Rebuilding: First Steps by the Coalition of Essential
Schools, Phi Delta Kappan, Sept. 1986, pp. 38-42
Titman, W., (1995) Special Places, Special People. The Hidden Curriculum
of School Grounds. Winchester: Learning Through Landscapes.
Torney-Purta, J., Schwille, J. and Amadeo, J. (1999) Civic Education
Across Countrie:IEA Civic Education Project. Amsterdam:IEA
Verba, S., Schlozman, K.L., And Brady, H.E. (1995) Voice and Equality:
Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge, Mass.:Harvard
University Press
Weber, R. (1998) in Ostini, M.(Ed) Report on Council of Europe Seminar
«Education for Democratic Citizenship» 11-12 December
1997. Strasbourg:Council of Europe
Zalaznik, E.(1980) The Just Community School: A Student Perspective.
Moral Education Forum 1980 vol. 5 pp 27-35
|
