Lets talk about socio-economic inequalities. Can citizenship education help?

A clear issue persists in the UK political sphere that threatens the legitimacy of our democratic institutions, our sense of representation, and for some, even compromises our status as citizens:

An ever growing socio-economic divide in political participation.

The foundation of our democracy relies on the assumption of equal representation through equal participation (Geboers et al., 2012; Hoskins & Janmaat, 2015). The threat to this arises when we consider that a huge portion of the more disadvantaged individuals are not going out to vote (Ipsos MORI, 2017). This means that they will be more likely to be alienated in the political arena as the government fails to reflect on their needs and concerns due to being disproportionately represented. But why aren’t they voting?

I argue that this is due to the nature of social classes, where there can be a generational inheritance privilege as some households are able to pass down the skills needed to be more engaged in political issues. These tend to be the more advantaged social classes (Ferguson, 2019). This, coupled with an ineffective citizenship educational curriculum in schools then leads to the level of inequality demonstrated in figure 1. However, I still maintain the belief that citizenship education is the answer to the issue of socio-economic inequality in political participation – there just needs to be some improvements.

Turnout Among Social Class in General Elections 2015/17 & EU Referendum 2016

The classification ‘AB’ found in Figure 1 refers to voters who have an intermediate or higher managerial, administrative, or professional role, whilst the classification ‘DE’ refers to semi or unskilled manual workers, as well as the unemployed (Ipsos MORI, 2009). Figure 1 demonstrates that there is a clear gap between both social gradings through the difference in voter turnout over the three most prominent and most recent political opportunities to have their voices heard. It is therefore evident that those categorized as having a low socio-economic status are less likely to participate in these major political opportunities compared to those of a higher status.

As previously stated, the household plays a major role in influencing this. Parents with or without privileges tend to pass on their societal position to the next generation. Middle class households, for example, tend to promote a home environment where participating in open discussions and critically reflecting on information in an autonomous manner to reach one’s own conclusion is encouraged (Hoskins et al., 2017). These are examples of the skillset necessary to effectively engage with political and social issues; therefore making young people from these households more likely to participate politically when they are given the opportunity (Geboers et al., 2012). However, this type of environment may be less present to the same extent in lower class households – leaving the disadvantaged at a further disadvantage in their preparedness for political participation.

If you are looking for a better illustration of the matter – here is an interesting comic strip that captures the socio-economic inheritance issue:

Generational Socio-Economic Inequality at Its Finest

But the question is: how can we move towards fixing this issue?

 

THE IMPORTANCE OF EFFECTIVE CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION

Jokes using the beloved Pink Floyd lyrics aside – there has been numerous amounts of research to suggest that schools and the provision of citizenship education are the answer (Hoskins et al., 2017; Hoskins & Janmaat, 2015; Ofsted, 2010). In September 2002, citizenship education was made compulsory for students aged 11 to 16, in an attempt to develop ‘good citizens’ – where they are given the skills to actively contribute to society through being socially and politically engaged (Geboers et al., 2012). In theory, citizenship education has the potential to equalize the playing field between the classes by encouraging the development of the necessary participatory skills outside of the home setting; providing more equal access (Hoskins et al., 2017). In practice, however, because this ‘access’ is not compulsory, it is difficult to monitor whether those from a lower socio-economic background are actually being included (Ofsted, 2010). It can be argued, for example, that the unmonitored level of ‘access’ may be the reason as to why the inequality gap has not yet been reduced in voter turnout.

Research has found that this can be achieved through encouraging an open classroom climate and participation in political activities within the school environment, such as joining the student council. It has also been found that those from a lower social background are more benefited from having access to citizenship education, and that their levels of political engagement can be enhanced significantly (Hoskins et al., 2017). According to an Ofsted investigation, this implementation into the compulsory citizenship curriculum found that it has had a positive impact – so we are definitely headed in the right direction but it is clear that more needs to be done (Ofsted, 2010).

 

NEXT STEPS?

The Ofsted report highlights many ways in which the quality of citizenship education in schools can be improved, however, I argue that higher quality and more specialist training for teachers is the best way to ensure that citizenship education is being delivered in an effective and inclusive manner. Regardless of whether students have access to the open classroom climate or political activities – it does not necessarily mean that they will have the motivation or confidence to participate (Hoskins et al., 2017). This is where the teacher comes in. Encouragement and effective monitoring from the teacher may go a long way towards ensuring that the underprivileged will learn the skills they need to become more likely to participate in the future (Ofsted, 2010).

 

What do you think?

 

Bibliography:

News.bbc.co.uk. (2019). BBC NEWS | Education | Citizenship lessons ‘inadequate’. [online] Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/5384522.stm [Accessed 27 Feb. 2019].

 

Tes. (2019). Call for debates to be compulsory for all secondary pupils. [online] Available at: https://www.tes.com/news/call-debates-be-compulsory-all-secondary-pupils [Accessed 27 Feb. 2019].

 

Ferguson, D. (2019). ‘Working-class children get less of everything in education – including respect’. [online] the Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/nov/21/english-class-system-shaped-in-schools [Accessed 27 Feb. 2019].

 

Geboers, E., Geijsel, F., Admiraal, W. and ten Dam, G. (2012). Review of the effects of citizenship education. Educational Research Review, [online] 9, pp.158-173. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.02.001 [Accessed 27 Feb. 2019].

 

Hoskins, B. and Janmaat, J. (2015). Educational trajectories and inequalities of political engagement among adolescents in England. Social Science Research, [online] 56, pp.73-89. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2015.11.005 [Accessed 27 Feb. 2019].

 

Hoskins, B., Janmaat, J. and Melis, G. (2017). Tackling inequalities in political socialisation: A systematic analysis of access to and mitigation effects of learning citizenship at school. Social Science Research, [online] 68, pp.88-101. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2017.09.001 [Accessed 27 Feb. 2019].

 

Hoskins, B., Janmaat, J., Han, C. and Muijs, D. (2014). Inequalities in the education system and the reproduction of socioeconomic disparities in voting in England, Denmark and Germany: the influence of country context, tracking and self-efficacy on voting intentions of students age 16–18. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, [online] 46(1), pp.69-92. Available at: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/30782540.pdf [Accessed 27 Feb. 2019].

 

Ipsos MORI (2009). Social Grade: A Classification Tool. [online] Ipsos MORI. Available at: https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/publication/6800-03/MediaCT_thoughtpiece_Social_Grade_July09_V3_WEB.pdf [Accessed 27 Feb. 2019]

 

Ipsos MORI (2017). How the voters voted in the 2017 election. Ipsos MORI estimates. [online] Ipsos MORI. Available at: https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/2017-06/how-britain-voted-in-the-2017-election_2.pdf [Accessed 27 Feb. 2019].

 

Janmaat, J., Mostafa, T. and Hoskins, B. (2014). Widening the participation gap: the effect of educational track on reported voting in England. Journal of Adolescence, [online] 37, pp.473-482. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.03.011 [Accessed 27 Feb. 2019].

 

Meikle, J. (2019). Schools poor at teaching citizenship, says Ofsted. [online] the Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/sep/28/schools.ofsted [Accessed 27 Feb. 2019].

 

Ofsted (2010). Citizenship Established?. Citizenship in schools 2006/09. [online] Ofsted, pp.1-64. Available at: https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/1094/1/Citizenship%20established.pdf [Accessed 27 Feb. 2019].