BRITISH JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL STUDIES, ISSN 0007-1005

VOL. 53, No. 3, SEPTEMBER2005, PP 341-358

CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND CHARACTER

EDUCATION: SIMILARITIES AND CONTRASTS

byIAN DAVIES, STEPHEN GORARD and NICK MCGUINN, University

of
York

ABSTRACT: Wesuggestthatthereis a needforthosewhoseektoexplore

issues associatedwith the implementation of citizenshipeducationin
England toclarify itsspecificnature.This can be done,at leastin part,
througha processofcomparison.To thatend we reviewsomeofthecon-
nectionsand disjunctionsbetween'character education'and 'citizenship
education'.Weargue,drawingfromUS and UK literature butfocusing
our attentionon contextsand issuesin England, thatthereare indeed
somebroadareas ofoverlapbetweenthesetwofields.Citizensshouldbe
of 'good'characterand theeducationalinitiativesthatwe considerboth
emergefroma concernabout currenttrendsin society.However,we
suggestthat theoverlapswithcitizenshipeducationprincipallyapply
whencharactereducationis drawn verybroadly.Whenwe examinea
particularapproachto charactereducationthatis oftenUS-based,and
titledas we notemanycontrastswithcitizenship education
'citizenship',
as formulatedin theNational Curriculumfor England. We suggest
thatcitizenship educatorsin England needto interpret claimsaboutthe
similarity betweenthesetwofieldswithcaution,or meaningsthatapply
to bothcharactereducationand citizenship educationwill be distorted.

education,implementation
character,
Keywords:citizenship,

1. INTRODUCTION
This articlehas,following threemain sections.First,
thisintroduction,
we reviewthesimilaritiesbetweencharactereducationand citizenship
education. Second, and at more length,we discuss the contrasts
betweencitizenship educationin theNationalCurriculumin England
and preciseformsofcharactereducationas presentedbyUS educators.
we suggestsome implications
Finally, fromour argument.We feelthat
academics and othersneed to be aware of the differencesthatwe
have discussed ifcharacter education is to be understood more fully.
341
? BlackwellPublishingLtd. and SES 2005

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND CHARACTER EDUCATION

2. SIMILARITIES BETWEEN CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND

CHARACTER EDUCATION

Both citizenshipeducationand charactereducationare oftenbroadly

characterised,relate to moral issues,emerge froma perceptionof
crisis(and make use of thatperceptionin order to gain curricular
footholds),have supporterswho employhighlyambitiousrhetoric
and who enjoy high statussupportwhile experiencinglow status
share some common notionsabout stylesof
in practice,and, finally,
teaching and learning.
Citizenshipneeds to be 'understoodand studied as a mosaic of
identities,dutiesand rightsratherthan a unitaryconcept' (Heater,
1999, p. 114). As such, citizenshipeducation can be located within
broadlydrawnparameters. In verybroad terms,the taskofcitizenship
education is to promoteand encourage individualsto playa better
part in our democracy.Citizenshiphas since August 2002 been a
foundationsubjectof theNationalCurriculumin Englandforpupils
aged 11 to 16 and part of a non-statutory frameworkalongside
Personal Social and Health Education (PSHE) forpupils aged 5 to
11 (DfEE/QCA, 1999). Pupils are expected to learn in threeareas:
knowledgeand understandingabout becoming informedcitizens;
developing the skills of enquiry and communication;developing
skillsof participationand responsibleaction.A desire to promotea
communitarianvisionand the influenceof the European Union in
relationto matterssuch as the implementation of the Human Rights
Actweresome ofthereasonsforthisinitiative(Giddens,1998;DfEE/
QCA, 1998; Kerr,2003).
There is no NationalCurriculumforcharactereducationbut it is
located most noticeablyin a range of bases in the US and can be
understoodverybroadly.It is not a singleentity(e.g. see thedebates
referredto by Glanzer 2003 about the need forboth diversity and
societal mooringsand criticismsby Nash 1997). Using this broad
perspective,charactereducatorsfocuson virtueas a 'traitor stateof
characterof a person whichis relatively entrenched' (McLaughlin
and Halstead, 1999, p. 134). Charactereducation can be taken to
encompassall of moral education,and also non-moralaspectssuch
as civicor culturalqualities.
In verygeneral terms,a decent societywould be concernedwith
questionsof bothcharacterand citizenship,as illustratedin thiswell-
knownplea forjustice:
I have a dreammyfourlittlechildrenwillone daylivein a nation
where theywill not be judged by the colour of theirskin but by the
content of their character. (King, 1992, p. 208)
342
? BlackwellPublishingLtd. and SES 2005

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND CHARACTER EDUCATION

Politicianswho are thefocusofmuch thatrelatesto citizenship,have

importantmoral responsibilities(Evans, 2004). More narrowly, but
perhaps more for
significantly the purposesof this it
article, can also
be assertedthatthe whole school is concerned withmattersto do
withvalues,characterand citizenship(Ungoed-Thomas,1997). There
are stronglinksbetweenthe twofieldsin termsof a connectionwith
moral education. Those who are significantin the developmentof
thinkingabout citizenshipeducation have also writtenabout moral
education (e.g. Dewey,1909). Hargreaves(1996) has arguedpersua-
sivelythat:
Activecitizensare as politicalas theyare moral;moral sensibility
derivesin partfrompoliticalunderstanding; politicalapathyspawns
moral apathy.
Both citizenship education and character education are closely
connectedwitha perceptionof crisisin society.The forewordto the
National CurriculumOrder forcitizenship(DfEE/QCA, 1999,p. 4)
includes the assertionthatcitizenshipwillhelp pupils 'to deal with
difficultmoral and social questions that arise in theirlives and in
society'.For citizenshipeducation (and its earlier incarnationsin
England such as political education in the 1970s and citizenship
educationin theearly1990s) crisiswasalwaysa keyfeatureofitsstatus.
Stradling(1987) refersto a greaterinterestin politicallearningin
1918, 1930 and 1939-45. Entwistle(1971) and Marshall(1988) make
the same point.In the firsthalfof the twentieth centuryvoices that
were heard at timesof crisissuch as Gollancz and Somervell(1914),
Stewart(1938) and Cole (1942) have been seen at timesof relative
as criesin thewilderness.The Council ofEurope in 1996was
stability
drawingattentionto the climateof intolerance,aggressivenational-
ism and ethnocentrismwhich expresses itselfin violence against
migrants, people ofimmigrant originand minoritiessuch as Gypsies.
These calls helped to develop the push towardsthe establishment of
theCrickcommittee in
thatwould turnlead to the National Curriculum
forcitizenship.Key figuresin the developmentof charactereduca-
tion also drawattentionto problemsin society.Lickona (1991), for
example, focuseson the problemsof youthin termsthat seem to
suggestsocial and moralbreakdown.Formsof citizenshipeducation
and charactereducation share the same sources as theyhave been
stimulatedby the perceived need to fightthe growthof political
extremismin the 1970s (Crick and Porter,1978); attemptsto over-
come economic inefficiency (as the New Righttried to introduce
economic diversity and an entrepreneurial spiritwithina substantive
moral framework) in the 1980s (Davies et al., 2004); and demands to
343
? BlackwellPublishingLtd. and SES 2005

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND CHARACTER EDUCATION

tacklemoraldecline, social fragmentation and risingcrimeparticu-

larlyamong youngpeople in the 1990s. More recently,in February
2004, when promotinginitiativesreliantupon formsof character
education and citizenshipeducation,the Prime Minister'sstrategy
unit stressedthe need for personal responsibility and behaviour
change claiming that 'the eventual aim is to entrench a habit of
personalresponsibility and restraint and a selfsustainingsocial norm'
(quoted byHaydon,2005, p. 5).
There is some evidence to suggestthatboth charactereducators
and citizenshipeducatorsare similarin thattheyboth make use of
this 'litanyof alarm' (Arthur,2003, p. 1) withoutany real basis for
doing so. There is some evidence thatthereis no crisis(Jowelland
Park, 1997). Sears (2001) has charted the panics thathave led to
curricularinitiativessuch as charactereducation and citizenship
educationand findsthemratherunpersuasive. Foreveryoutcryagainst
the societythat now 'bowls alone' (Putnam, 2000) there is other
workthatis more positive(e.g. White etal., 2000; Whiteley,2004).
Recent research undertakenby the Home Officefindsvolunteer-
ing increasing(Woodward,2004; Munton and Zurawan,2004, see
www.homeoffice.gov.uk). Large scale multination studies(e.g. Tomey-
Purta et al., 2001) have not reported crises in the viewsof young
people. But perhapsperceptionmattersmore thanrealityin seeking
to understandthewillingness to embraceinitiatives such as character
education and citizenshipeducationand both fieldshave benefited
as high profilepoliticiansand othershave offeredtheirsupportfor
both typesof initiative.
Unsurprisingly, given that citizenshipeducation and character
educationare the responsesto crises,the benefitsof theseinitiatives
are discussedin expansiveterms.The positiverelationshipbetween
academic achievement and character education and citizenship
educationis at timesreferredto (e.g. Huffman,1994;Trafford, 1993)
but thereare even granderambitions.Each has been presentedas
themeansbywhichverymanysocietalproblemscan be ameliorated.
Of the threereasons Lickona (1994) givesforcharactereducation
onlyone refersto itscapacityto help youngpeople learn more; the
otherreasonsare thatit helps themto become more human and it
builds a moral society.Crick'sambitionsfor citizenshipeducation
includedthedeterminationto 'transform the politicalcultureof this
country'(DfEE/QCA, 1998,p. 7). The workofthe civilrenewalunit
in the Home Officethathas been closelyconnected in the recent
past, especiallythroughDavid Blunkettat thatdepartmentand at
the Department for Education and Skills, is said to be ambitiously
concerned with local people 'identifyingand solving the problems
344
? BlackwellPublishingLtd. and SES 2005

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND CHARACTER EDUCATION

that affecttheir communities [to achieve] the common good'

(www.homeoffice.gov.uk).
Neverthelessthe assertionof importancedoes not automatically
lead to high statusin practiceand thisdistinctionis anotherwayof
revealing overlap between character education and citizenship
education.Of course,much has happened recentlyto supportboth
citizenshipeducation and charactereducation.We do not wish to
argue thatthe inclusionof citizenshipinto the NationalCurriculum
or the statementsof high statuspoliticiansdo not show potentially
forcefuleffectiveformsof support. Citizenshipeducation in par-
ticular has recentlyreceived in England some significantinputs.
Various governmentagencies have been proactivein supporting
citizenshipas a subject.Kerr (2003) has reviewedsome of thesesup-
portmechanisms.The DepartmentforEducation and Skillshas set
up a citizenshipteamwhichhas sponsoredthe creationofclassroom
materialsand helped to establisha subjectassociationforteachers,
theAssociationforCitizenship Teaching(ACT). The TeacherTraining
Agencyhas fundedthecitizEDproject(see www.citized.info) thatseeks
to develop a forumforaction among thosewho are responsiblefor
newlyestablishedinitialteacher education programmesand con-
tinuingprofessionaldevelopmentin citizenship.The Qualifications
and CurriculumAuthority(QCA) has produced a seriesof schemes
of work for Key Stages 3 and 4 in order to assist teachers. Non-
governmentalorganisationssuch as the CitizenshipFoundation,
InstituteforCitizenshipand CommunityServiceVolunteershave
all been activein the creationof materials,and runningworkshops
designedto supportand exploretheimplementation oftheNational
Curriculum.
For charactereducation there is a similarhigh statusassertion
of significance.In February1997 as part of his State of the Union
speech, PresidentClintonspoke of an attempt'to make education
our number one priority'(2004, pp. 743-744) and introduceda
numberof reformsincluding'charactereducation in everyschool'.
StatementsfromPresidentBush during'National CharacterCounts
Week' in 2003 and 2004 (see www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases)
stressthat'the developmentof characterand citizenshiphas always
been a primarygoal of America'. Arthur(2003) and Arthurand
Revell (2004) have,referring to the workof a numberof academics
and policymakerscommentedon the recentlyraised profilewithin
the UK of charactereducation.In 1996 a NationalForumforValues
in Education and the Communitywas establishedin an attemptto
identifythe values about which there was common agreement. A
National AdvisoryGroup on Personal, Social and Health education
345
? BlackwellPublishingLtd. and SES 2005

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND CHARACTER EDUCATION

was set up in 1999. The reformof the NationalCurriculumfor2000

emphasisedthe significance theguidelines
ofvalueswith,confusingly,
forPSHE and citizenship thesame (Haydon,
educationbeingvirtually
2005, p. 16). The Green Paper Schools:Building on Success(February
2001) and the White Paper, Schools AchievingSuccess (September
2001) are concernedwithvalues.
However,theabove does notmean thathighstatusactivity is taking
place in schools. Both character education and education
citizenship
sufferfromlow status.The National Foundation forEducational
Research (NFER) is undertakinga largescale longitudinalstudyinto
the NationalCurriculumforcitizenship.Priorto the introductionof
the National CurriculumforCitizenship'a verychallengingpicture
emergedof whatneeded to be done ifcitizenshipeducationwas to
be implementedsuccessfully. More recentresearchfromthisNFER
project undertaken in 2003 shows thatschoolsare at different stages
in implementingcitizenshipeducation.These categorieshave been
used by the governmentin developing a continuingprofessional
developmentmatrix.2 Schoolsare invitedto use thematrixin a process
of selfassessmentin orderto ascertaintheircurrentpositionand to
anticipatehow theymightbecome more successfulin theirimple-
mentationof citizenshipeducation. If a school decides thatit is at
stageone as designatedbythe documentthenverylittleis beingdone
including the absence of an appointed citizenshipco-ordinator.
Supportfromthe DfES forcitizenshipeducationis not as strongas
it once was. Citizenship education is now regarded as the worst
taught subject in England." Character education is perceived as
being of lowerstatusthan citizenshipeducation. For example, the
policy statementsreferredto above are 'less substantialand less
influentialthan the Crickreport' (Haydon, 2005, p. 14). As such it
is perhaps reasonable to suggestthatat least as an explicitformof
education it is of a similaror lowerstatusthan citizenship.
Charactereducation and citizenshipeducation also share some
similarnotions about pedagogy.Citizenshipeducation stressesthe
importanceof classroomclimate.This is done byboth a wide range
of policymakers (e.g. Crick,2004) and researchers(Ehman, 1980;
Hahn, 1998; Torney-Purta etal., 2001). Some in the past have gone
so faras to advocatea constitutional classroomin whichthemethods
of teachingand learningshould be congruentwithan intentionto
prepare pupils foractiveinvolvementin a democraticsociety(Reid
and Whittingham,1984). Generallyin moral education there is a
stronginsistenceon the need forappropriateprocesses.In the field
of charactereducationthereis also some researchevidenceto suggest
thatmethods appropriate fordemocracyare effective.Although young
346
? BlackwellPublishingLtd. and SES 2005

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND CHARACTER EDUCATION

people tend not to acknowledge the influence of teachers it is

possiblethata powerfuleffectmayactuallybe achieved (Elickerand
Fortner-Wood, 1995; Jacksonet al., 1992; Wernerand Smith,1992;
Williamsetal., 2003).
In the above we have argued thatthereis a greatdeal of overlap
betweencharactereducation and citizenshipeducation. Indeed the
currentofficially promotedversionof citizenshipeducation includ-
ing social and moralresponsibility as one of threekeyfeatureshigh-
lightedwithinthe Crickreportshowsthe natureof the overlapvery
clearly.It is necessarynow in a more detailed elaboration of the
nature of charactereducation and citizenshipeducation to make
clear whatdistinguishes both areas.

3. DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND

CHARACTER EDUCATION

When precise formsof character education are compared with

citizenshipeducation in the National Curriculumfor England sig-
nificantdifferences emerge.We willfocuson the followingareas in
orderto illuminatethatdistinctiveness: academictraditions;curricular
organisation;preferredviewof the relationshipbetweenindividuals
and the state; curricularcontent;attitudetowards'right'answers;
attitudetowardsstagesof learning.
Haydon (2005) has suggestedthatalthoughcitizenshipeducation
is centrallyconcerned withmorality, the keydifferencebetweenit
and more explicitformsof personaland moral educationareas can
be found in the informationabout and otherreferencesto specific
social and politicalcontexts.In otherwords,althoughtherewould
be a good deal of overlap,citizenshipeducationwillalwaysconcern
itselfwith the explorationof the search for and abuses of moral
thinkingand conductprincipallyas it emergesfrom,and relatesto,
social and politicalframeworks. Charactereducation is concerned
principallywith morals.This differencecan be demonstratedeasily
by reference to academic traditionsas exemplifiedbyreferences to the
key thinkers that are made by citizenship and character educators.
A drivingintellectualforceofcontemporary citizenshipeducation
in England is Marshall (1963). His ideas have been summarisedin
fullby variousauthors (e.g. Barbalet,1988; Heater, 1999, 2004) to
show thatthe growthof rights(civil,politicaland social) between
the seventeenthand twentiethcenturiesare whatdrivescitizenship
education. More recently,communitarianthinking (e.g. Frazer,
1999) and the influenceof the European Union especiallyin rela-
tion to human rightslegislation have been significant(Crick, 2000).
347
? BlackwellPublishingLtd. and SES 2005

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND CHARACTER EDUCATION

Crick (1964) is a political scientist,well known for the classic In

DefenceofPoliticsand interestedin the teaching and learning of
politicalconcepts (Crick,1978), not a moral philosopher.However,
thosewho have influencedcharactereducationin recentyearsdraw
principallyfromthosewho focusprincipallyon moral ideas. Those
thinkershaveverydifferent perspectives fromthe social and political
orientationsof the citizenshipeducators.Our readingsuggeststhat
threeauthorsare particularly significantto the developmentof con-
temporary charactereducation: Lickona (e.g. 1991),Bennet(e.g. 1993)
and Kilpatrick(e.g. 1993). Giventhefocusofthesebookson theneed
forindividualmorality in thefaceofsocietalbreakdownitis no surprise
thatin a reviewof literatureArthur(2003) devotesseparatechapters
to thevirtuesofcharacter,and to theologicalinsightsintocharacter.
Our pointis not to claim thatone approach in broad termsis better
than another;we do, however,wishto insistthatcharacterand citi-
zenship education drawfromverydifferent sources of inspiration.
Charactereducation and citizenshipeducation differin the way
theyare practicallyorganised.School subjectsdevelop in particular
ways (Goodson, 1983). Citizenshipis a school subject in England,
charactereducationis not. This does not mean thatcitizenshipedu-
catorsdo not see a wide range of issuesand connectionswithinand
beyondtheirown field.For example,teacherssee theirown citizen-
ship being intimately connected to the natureof theirrelationships
withtheirparents.It is unsurprisingthereforethatone of the chief
threatsto citizenshipidentifiedbyteachersis the problemof family
conflict(Davies etal, 1999, p. 66). But charactereducation is more
expansivethan citizenshipeducation and thismeans thatit is often
directlyconcerned withthose who are normallynotto be found in
school.Huffmann (1994,p. 31), forexample,seesparentsas a keygroup.
The American'no childleftbehind' initiative has a strongassociation
withcharactereducation and has a separate sectionon itsweb site
for parents http://www.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml. The Maryland
Center for character education (http://www.mdctrcharacter.org/
Parents.shtml) similarlyhighlightsthe importanceofparents.Whilst
intendedoutcomesforcitizenshipeducationcan relateverybroadly
to thebuildingofa betterworld(Davies etal., 2002) the thrustof the
materials,activities,programmesof citizenshipeducation is about
learnerswho are being introducedto a wayof thinkingand acting
thatis clearlydistinctfromothersubjectsbut is a subjector formof
knowledge.In England citizenshipis demonstratedin the formof a
National CurriculumOrder in the same wayas othersubjectssuch
as Maths and English with all the associated paraphernalia including
examinations. The formsof character education that are considered

348
? BlackwellPublishingLtd. and SES 2005

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND CHARACTER EDUCATION

in thisarticlelack the curriculumframework of citizenshipeduca-

tionbut look more broadlyto the community beyondthe school for
immediateimpact.
This expansivenessof charactereducatorscan be explored more
fullyin order to identifythe nature of citizenshipeducation and
charactereducation.Citizenshipeducatorsare essentially concerned
withhelping people to learn throughand about issues thatrelate
to a politywhile almost nothingis beyond the scope of character
education.Charactereducatorshold 'out the hope ofwhata person
can be as opposed to what theyare naturally'(Arthur,2003, p. 8).
Of course, there are ambitioustargetsassociated with citizenship
education and thereare at timesverybroad encapsulationsused by
teachersas theydiscusscitizenshipand theirapproach to citizenship
education.This searchingforbreadthand inclusionat timesbrings
significantchallengesfor citizenshipeducators.Heater (2004) has
arguedfora multi-layered and multi-levelledapproach to citizenship
thatbeginsto hintat the difficultiesof tryingto do too much. Con-
siderationof the civicrepublicanand liberaltraditions(Heater,1999)
are usefulforallowingus to see the spectrumof a wide and lively
debate thatseeks greaterclarityabout the meaning of citizenship.
However,Audigier (1998) in the followingquotation as well as
referring to the breadthof citizenshipeducation is also providinga
warningto teachersabout a potentialloss of focus:
Since the citizenis an informedand responsibleperson,capable
of takingpart in public debate and makingchoices, nothingof
what is human should be unfamiliarto him [sic], nothing of
what is experienced in societyshould be foreignto democratic
citizenship.(p. 13)
Citizenshipeducationis concernedwith,relatively, limitedaimsin a
particularcurricularframework: charactereducation is concerned
much more ambitiously withmoralityin and beyondschool.
Whatthenis taughtin charactereducationand citizenshipeduca-
tion?A significant differencecan be seen betweenthe twofieldsin
relationto content.Charactereducatorsseem to use threetypesof
contentwhichwe willcall: theeveryday, theexemplaryrolemodel and
the 6lite.These typesof knowledgeare all expected to have moral
impact. Generally,on the other hand, citizenshipeducation looks
for knowledge about societyand explores it for the purpose of
promotingskillsand dispositionsthatcan be usefulin a democratic
society.There are verymanyexamplesofthepromotionofcharacter
education through directions to act honestly when shopping, to
vote, to obey.4There are also examples through character education
349
? BlackwellPublishingLtd. and SES 2005

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND CHARACTER EDUCATION

resourcesthatfocus on heroes (e.g. using storiesabout heroes to

teach values)." Some of those examples are referredto below. One
of the best-known illustrations of the use ofeliteknowledgebysome
charactereducatorscan be seen in the contextofEnglisheducation.
There are manyconnectionsbetweenEnglishand charactereduca-
tion and citizenshipeducation includingdebates overpreparations
forfunctionality in society,the developmentof human and humane
sensitivitythroughpoetryand the political implicationsof a post
modem literary criticism (see Barthes,1982;Cox, 1991;Hughes,1993).
However,forreasonsofspace,we restrict ourselvesto a consideration
oftheuse ofliterature in charactereducationand citizenship education
classrooms.Bloom (1987) seems to align himselfwiththe character
educators by arguing against those whom he perceives as having
rejectedthevalue of l1iteknowledgeand so 'impoverishedthe souls
of today'sstudents'.Many US based charactereducation web sites
encourageyoungpeople to read classicliterature.6 Of course,thereare
in
examples citizenship education programmes the use of classic
of
literature.1984 is used to exploredemocracyand dictatorship, ToKill
a Mockingbirdto teachabout the need forracialharmonyetc. but the
textsare tobe exploredand are notseen in themselves toprovidemoral
uplift.Bloom (1996) seemsin ourviewto be rightwhenhe assertsthat
'readingtheverybestwriters - letus sayHomer,Danteand Shakespeare,
Tolstoy- is not going to make us bettercitizens'(p. 16). Literature
is used bycitizenshipeducatorsnot fordirectmoralguidance but to
explore key ideas about democraticsocietyand to develop useful
skillsforparticipating in thatsortof context.In charactereducation
'good' literaturehas in itselfthe capacityformoral uplift.
Characterand citizenshipexponentsviewthepurpose ofteaching
verydifferently. Generally,charactereducatorsinsiston the accept-
ance of 'right'answersby learners.Of course,thisis not trueof all
charactereducators.Arthur(2003, p. 8) has made clear that'Char-
acter education is not the same as behaviour control,discipline,
trainingor indoctrination'.However,a hintoftheviewsofsome who
approach characterrathermore narrowly(and it is withthose that
we are principallyconcerned in thisarticle) can be seen in the fol-
lowingquotationin whichbehaviouris emphasised:
Charactereducation is definedas any school-instituted
program,
designed in co-operationwithother communityinstitutions, to
shape directlyand systematically, of
the behaviour youngpeople
valuesbelieveddirectly
the non-relativistic
byinfluencingexplicitly
to bringabout thatbehaviour.(Lockwood,1997,p. 179,quoted by
Arthur,2003, p. 8)
350
? BlackwellPublishingLtd. and SES 2005

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND CHARACTER EDUCATION

Othersare much less circumspectand go beyondhintingthattypes

of behaviour are to be encouraged. Halstead and Taylor (2000)
have argued that much of charactereducation is focussedon the
perceivedneed for childrento practise'desirable' charactertraits
untilthosetraitshavebeen internalised. The Centerforthe 4" and 5?
'r's: respectand responsibility
(http://www.cortland.edu/character/
index.asp) could not be clearer in its determinationto emphasise
certain perspectives.The initiativeknown as 'character counts'
http://www.charactercounts.org/defsix.htm is similarlyprescriptive,
claimingthatcitizenshipmeans 'cooperate,vote,be a good neighbor,
obeylawsand rules,respectauthority'. Some suggestthatveryprecise
responses should be taught.For example, some use dilemmasin
charactereducationclassroomsin orderto providestudentswithan
opportunity to be toldwhatto do in specificcircumstances.One (of
many)examplescan be seen at www.pacerpost.com/yesample32.htm
(accessed 25January2005) as an eleventhgraderis askedwhathe or
she would do ifa shop assistantmakesan errorat the tillthatwould
benefitthe shopper. Two points are awarded and a comment of
'excellent answer' for those who realise that the 'golden rule ... is
the "ethicof reciprocity"
'.
Of course,we do not denythatsimilarissuesabout the provision
of rightanswershave not been raised at timesin relationto citizen-
ship education.We feelthatrecentlyabandoned characterisations of
citizenshipeducation were unhelpfullyspecificin the potentially
undemocraticoutcomesthattheyfavoured.The emphasisplaced on
young people having the (intentionallycontradictory)'voluntary
obligations'(Hurd, 1988) to thosewho used to receivestatebenefits
was perhapsless thanwhollydemocratic.It seemed thatHurd wanted
to forceyoungpeople to volunteerbutacceptingthatthegovernment
lacked the power to enforcesuch a policy.Some (e.g. Green and
Gamarnikov,2000) have argued thatthe currentversionof citizen-
ship education,in itsofficially
sanctionedformulationin England,is
prone to notionsthatare similarly behaviourist.
This opens up a potentiallydangerousspace forthe deepening of
politicalcomplacency,absolvingthe statefromresponsibility for
economic and politicalregeneration,while locating the socially
wellplaced as resourceswithobligationsforrenewingcivilsociety
and its capacity for social capital building. ... It reproduces a
versionof citizenshipeducation unlikelyto challenge the social
mechanismsof inequalityreproduction.(pp. 110-111)
This seemsto reflectthegeneralpositionto whicha numberofcritics
seekto givemorepreciseexpression.Osler (2003), forexample,seems
351
? BlackwellPublishingLtd. and SES 2005

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND CHARACTER EDUCATION

to developtheabovegeneralargumentintoa strongly wordedcritique

of the Crick report,perceivingit as 'an example of institutional
racism' (p. 49). Further,we mustwonderwhycitizenshipeducation
ratherthan somethinglike human rightseducationhas been legiti-
matedbypolicymakersat a timewhen much of the currentpolitical
debate is drivenbyconcernsoverasylumseekersand otherpotential
and actual immigrants.However,in intentionand in practice,we
wishto arguethatcitizenship educationis concernedtopromoteaction
and thoughtthat is appropriate for a democratic and pluralistic
society.Despite the manychallenging issues thatremain and the
variousinterpretations thatcan and should be developed in demo-
craticdebate, citizenshipeducation has not seen the sortof specific
insistencerevealedbycharactereducators.We argue thatin citizen-
shipeducationitis commonforteachersto use a dynamicexploration
of dilemmaswithina specificframeworkof values and thatthis is
verydifferent fromtheinsistenceon rightanswersfromat leastsome
of the character educators. We do not suggestthat there will be
simpleconsensusabout all difficult issues;ifthatwereto be the case
therewould be no dilemmas.We are not suggesting,however,that
in citizenshiplessons clear answerscannot be givento students.We
wantto avoidbothan inappropriaterarefiedacademic promotionof
relativism(e.g. Jenkins,1996) as well as the 'postmodernismof the
streets'thatCrick(2004,p. 10) has referred to whenwarningteachers
and othersnot to treatmatterssuperficially. We do not argueforstu-
dentsmerelyto clarify theirvalues (anyvalues) as social and political
issues are discussed.Bevir (1994) has convincinglyexplained that
because we respect established standards of evidence and reason
we willpreferwebsofinterpretation thatare accuratecomprehensive
and consistent.We agreewithHaydon (1999), and feelthatcitizenship
education can make use of thisrational approachwhileat thesame
timealso recognisingthesubtlety ofmoraljudgementwithinsocietal
contexts.
In practice,when teachers are asked about the methods they
would use forcitizenshipthereis normallyagreementthata genuine
explorationof dilemmasto be solvedwithina democraticsocietyis
preferred.This is not alwaysstraightforward. Preachingto students
about controversialissues is not normallyrecommendedor prac-
tisedin citizenshipeducation and itsforerunners; thiswould in any
case be ineffectiveas researchfromthe University of Torontoshows
(Grusecand Dix, 1986). In factteachersare advisedand are actually
in the habit of choosing betweenmethodssuch as the committed,
the balanced and the devil's advocate in order to promote critical
and responsible thinkingand action (DfEE/QCA, 1998; Gaspar, 1985;
352
? Blackwell Publishing Ltd. and SES 2005

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND CHARACTER EDUCATION

Stradlingetal., 1984). There is no sensewhen theymake thischoice

thattheyare not prepared to guide theirstudents.We have found
thatteacherswho use dilemmasin the classroomhave to negotiate
the challengesofbeing honestevenwhenideas are held thatare not
normativeand to focus on learning goals for specific groups of
students(Davies etal., 2004).
The orderin whichlearningis to takeplace is anotherof theways
in whichthereis overlapbut significant differencebetweencharacter
education and citizenship education. Character educators insist
thattheremustbe an acceptance of moral normsprior to any real
engagementwithmattersthatrequirethoughtand action.In citizen-
ship education the National Curriculumbeginsonlyin Key Stage 3
when moststudentsare aged 11 and finishesat the end of KeyStage
4 when theyare 16. In KeyStages 1 and 2 (forstudentsaged 5-11)
citizenshipformspartof the PSHE framework, the rationaleforthis
being thatyoungerchildrencan understandand relatemore easily
to personal ratherthan societalmatters.This curricularframework
for citizenshipis hard to justifyin educational terms.When the
researchevidencerelatingto politicaleducationis consideredthere
seems littlejustificationforcitizenshipeducation to be considered
differentlyforyoungerstudents.Greenstein(1965), Connell (1972),
Stevens (1982) agreed thatyoung childrenare exposed to images
about societyand can make sense of them.This leads us to suggest
thatthe decision to limitan explicitlyorganisedformof citizenship
education to KeyStages3 and 4 probablyhad somethingto do with
Therewas,we feel,a perceived
theneed to respectpoliticalsensitivities.
need to recogniseboth the alreadyexistingpressureon curriculum
time thatwas apparentwiththe introductionof a new subjectand
the demands of competingareas. The statedneed to realise a care-
fullyconsidered education policy that included political literacy
thatwas feltto be more suited to childrenaged 11 to 16 was prob-
ablya wayofjustifyingthe victoryof citizenshipeducation and the
compromiseof placing it withina PSHE frameworkfor younger
children.Given the securingof curriculumtimeforthese students
it seems somewhatdisingenuousof Kerr (2001, p. 21) to claim that
'this did not mean that citizenshipeducation had won out over
other areas under considerationin the revisednational framework
forschools'.
Charactereducation, on the other hand, is more determinedly
committedto different stagesoflearningforis ownsake and notjust
because of the politicsof policymaking.The acceptance of moral
norms is essential before other work can take place. Again the wider
ambitions and contexts of character education can be seen as the

353
? Blackwell Ltd.and SES 2005
Publishing

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AND CHARACTER EDUCATION

focusand the need forspecificideas and practicesto be instilledat

an earlyage are emphasised.

4. IMPLICATIONS

We have suggestedabove thatalthoughthereare some similarities

between charactereducation and citizenshipeducation there are,
when precise educational initiativesare considered,many signifi-
cant differences.We feel thatit is necessaryto identifythese differ-
ences in the context of the many US based character based
initiativesthat provide free classroom resources labelled 'citizen-
ship'. As a resultof identifyingthese similaritiesand distinctions
we argue thatteachersmustbe carefulwhen theyread thatthereis
an 'intimateconnection' (Arthur,2003, p. 2) between character
education and citizenshipeducation. There is indeed an intimate
connection but only if broad perspectivesand comparisons are
being used. Academics and policymakersare currentlydiscussing
charactereducation and citizenshipeducation too loosely.The cit-
izenshipeducation initiativein England is verynew and somewhat
fragile.Trainingfor teachersis limitedand school practiceis rela-
tivelyweak. In a contextin which,as we have shown,high status
politicianscall for both charactereducation and citizenshipedu-
cation to be developed, where teachersare criticisedby the Chief
Inspectorofschoolsin Englandformakingcitizenshipeducationthe
worsttaughtsubjectit is clear thatteacherswilllook foreasyto use
Ifteachersdownloadresources
resourcesthatare labelled'citizenship'.
fromsome US charactereducation sites thathighlightcitizenship
(e.g. the MarylandCenterfor CharacterEducation; the California
PartnershipforCharacterEducationwww.youthcitizenship.org) they
should realise that the ideas and practicesthatare recommended
are inappropriatefor the developmentof the kind of citizenship
education thatcurrentlyformspart of the National Curriculumin
England.
We suggestthata furtherelaborationof citizenshipeducation is
needed that would make more clear the differencesbetween
formsof character education and work that is required by the
National Curriculum. This would involve collaborative work
between those in universities,government departments and
agencies, subjectassociations,schools and elsewherein projectsin
which key perspectivesare explored and translatedinto practical
programmes.In the absence of this clearer articulation,formsof
character education will develop in England and be titled 'citizen-
ship education'.
354
? BlackwellPublishingLtd. and SES 2005

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIPEDUCATIONAND CHARACTER
EDUCATION

5. NOTES
1 accessed 13 December 2004.
http://www.nfer.ac.uk/research/early.asp
2 www.dfes.gov.uk/citizenship/section.cfm?sectionlD=1&hierachy=1&arti-
cleID=145 accessed 13 December 2004.
3 http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=news.details&id=1654.
4 http://www.msue.msu.edu/msue/cyf/youth/charcoun.html.
5 http://www.giraffe.org/kl
2_18.html.
6 e.g. http://midgefrazel.net/character.html.

6. REFERENCES
ARTHUR,J. (2003) EducationwithCharacter: theMoralEconomy ofSchooling(London,
RoutledgeFalmer).
ARTHUR,J. and REVELL, L. (2004) Character Formation in Schoolsand theEducation
ofTeachers (CanterburyChristChurchUniversity College in partnershipwiththe
Esmee FairburnFoundation).
AUDIGIER, F. (1998) Basic Concepts and CoreCompetences ofEducationforDemocratic
Citizenship:an InitialConsolidated
Report(Strasbourg,Council of Europe).
BARBALET,J.M. (1988) Citizenship (MiltonKeynes,Open University Press).
BARTHES, R. (1982) A BarthesReader(New York,Hill and Wang).
BENNET, W.J.(1993) TheBookofVirtues: A TreasuryofGreatMoralStories (New York,
Simon and Schuster).
BEVIR, M. (1994) Objectivity in history, Historyand Theory, 34 (3), 328-344.
BLOOM, A. (1987) TheClosingoftheAmerican Mind:HowHigherEducationhasFailed
Democracy and Impoverished theSouls of Today'sStudents(New York,Simon and
Schuster).
BLOOM, H. (1996) The Western Canon: TheBooksand SchooloftheAges(London,
Papermac).
CLINTON, B. (2004) MyLife(London, Hutchinson).
COLE, M. (1942) Education forDemocracy (London, Allen and Unwin).
CONNELL, R.W. (1972) TheChild'sConstruction ofPolitics(Melbourne,Melbourne
University Press).
COX, B. (1991) Cox on Cox: an EnglishCurriculum forthe1990s (London, Hodder
and Stoughton).
CRICK, B. (1964) In Defence ofPolitics(Harmondsworth, Penguin).
CRICK,B. (1978) Basic conceptsforpoliticaleducation.In B. CRICK and A. PORTER
(Eds) PoliticalEducationand PoliticalLiteracy(London, Longman).
CRICK, B. (2000) Essayson Citizenship (London, Continuum).
CRICK, B. (2004) Whycitizenshipat all? In B. LINSLEY and E. RAYMENT (Eds)
BeyondtheClassroom: ExploringActiveCitizenshipin 11-16 Education(London, New
PoliticsNetwork).
CRICK, B. and PORTER, A. (Eds) (1978) PoliticalEducationand PoliticalLiteracy
(London, Longman).
DAVIES, I., GREGORY,I. and RILEY, S.C. (1999) GoodCitizenship and Educational
Provision(London, Falmer).
DAVIES, I., GREGORY, I. and McGUINN, N. (2002) KeyDebatesin Education
(London, Continuum).
DAVIES, I., FULOP, M., HUTCHINGS, M., ROSS, A. and BERKICS, M. (2004)
Citizenshipand enterprise:issuesfroman investigation of teachers'perceptions
in England and Hungary,Comparative Education,40 (3), 363-384.

355
? BlackwellPublishingLtd. and SES 2005

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIPEDUCATIONAND CHARACTER
EDUCATION

DEWEY,J. (1909) MoralPrinciples

in Education(Boston,Houghton Mifflin).
DfEE/QCA (1998) Educationfor Citizenship in Schools
and theTeachingofDemocracy
(London, Qualificationsand CurriculumAuthority).
DfEE/QCA (1999) Citizenship.TheNationalCurriculumforEngland(London, DfEE,
QCA).
EHMAN, L. (1980) Change in highschool students'politicalattitudesas a function
ofsocial studiesclassroomclimate,American Educational ResearchJournal, 17, 253-
265.
ELICKER, J. and FORTNER-WOOD, C. (1995) Adult-childrelationshipsin early
childhood programs,YoungChildren, 51 (2), 69-78.
ENTWISTLE, H. (1971) Towardsan educational theoryof politicalsocialisation.
Paper presented at the Philosophy of Education Society conference, New
Orleans, 15 April.
EVANS,M. (2004) Politiciansas paragonsofvirtue:liberalismand ethicalexempli-
ficationin public life,JournalofPoliticalIdeologies,9 (1), 51-69.
FRAZER,E. (1999) TheProblems of Communitarian unityand conflict
Politics: (Oxford,
OxfordUniversity Press).
GASPAR,I. (1985) Handling politicalissues in the classroom,Teaching Politics,14
(1), 41-51.
GIDDENS, A. (1998) TheThirdWay:theRenewalofSocialDemocracy (London, Polity
Press).
GLANZER, P.L. (2003) Did the moral education establishmentkill character?An
autopsyof the death of character, JournalofMoralEducation,32 (3), 291-306.
GOLLANCZ, V. and SOMERVELL, D. (1914) PoliticalEducationat a PublicSchool
(London, Collins).
GOODSON, I. (1983) SchoolSubjects and Curriculum Change(London, Croom Helm).
GREEN, E. and GAMARNIKOV,A. (2000) Citizenship,Education and Social Capi-
tal. In D. LAWTON,J. CAIRNS and R. GARDNER (Eds) Education forCitizenship
(London, Continuum).
GREENSTEIN, F. (1965) Children and Politics(London, Yale University Press).
GRUSEC, J.E. and DIX, T. (1986) The socialisationof pro-socialbehavior:theory
and reality.In C. ZAHN-WAXLER, E.M. CUMMINGS and R. IANNOTTI
(Eds) Altruism andAggression:Biologicaland SocialOrigins(Cambridge,Cambridge
University Press).
HAHN, C. (1998) Becoming Political:Comparative Perspectiveson CitizenshipEducation
(Albany,SUNY).
HALSTEAD,M. and TAYLOR,M. (2000) TheDevelopment ofValues,AttitudesandPersonal
Qualities:a ReviewofRecent Research(Slough,NationalFoundationforEducational
Research).
HARGREAVES,D. (1996) TheMosaicofLearning(London, Demos).
HAYDON,G. (1999) The moralagenda.In D. LAWTON,J.CAIRNSand R. GARDNER
(Eds) Education forCitizenship (London, Continuum).
HAYDON, G. (2005) The importance of PSHE: a philosophical perspectiveon
Personal,Social and Health Education.PhilosophyofEducationSocietyof Great
Britain(No. 10 in a seriesof policydiscussions).
HEATER, D. (1999) Whatis Citizenship? (Cambridge,PolityPress).
HEATER, D. (2004) Citizenship: theCivicIdeal in World History,Politicsand Education
(Manchester,ManchesterUniversity Press).
HUFFMAN, H. (1994) Developing a Character EducationProgram:One SchoolDistrict's
Experience (Alexandria (VA), CharacterEducation Partnershipand Association
forSupervisionand Partnership).

356
? BlackwellPublishingLtd. and SES 2005

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIPEDUCATIONAND CHARACTER
EDUCATION

HUGHES, R. (1993) CultureofComplaint: theFrayingofAmerica(New York,Oxford

University Press).
HURD, D. (1988) Freedom will flourishwhere citizensaccept responsibility. The
Independent, 13 February.
JACKSON, P.W.,BOOSTROM, R.E. and HANSEN, D.T. (1992) The MoralLifeof
Schools(San Fransisco,JosseyBass).
JENKINS, K. (1996) On 'Whatis History':fromCarrand Elton to Rortyand White
(London, Routledge).
JOWELL, R. and PARK, A. (1997) Young People, Politics and Citizenship - a
Disengaged Generation?Paper deliveredat the CitizenshipFoundationAnnual
Colloquium (London, CitizenshipFoundation).
KERR,D. (2001) Citizenship educationand educationalpolicymaking.InJ.ARTHUR,
I. DAVIES, D. KERR, T. HAYDN and A. WRENN TeachingCitizenship through
Secondary History (London, RoutledgeFalmer).
KERR, D. (2003) Citizenshipeducation in England: the makingof a new subject,
OnlineJournal forSocialScienceEducation(http://www.sowi-onlinejournal.de/2003-
2/england_kerr.htm).
KILPATRICK,W. (1993) Why Johnny Can'tTellRight fromWrong: MoralLiteracyand the
CaseforCharacter Education(New York,Simon and Schuster).
KING, M.L. (1992) I have a dream. In C. RICKS and W.L. VANCE (Eds) TheFaber
BookofAmerica(London, Faber and Faber).
LICKONA, T. (1991) Educating forCharacter (New York,BantamBooks).
LICKONA, T. (1994) Foreword.In H.A. HUFFMAN Developing Education
a Character
Program:One SchoolDistrict's Experience(Alexandria,VA,Associationfor Supervi-
sion and CurriculumDevelopmentand the CharacterEducation Partnership).
MARSHALL, S.J.(1988) The originsand developmentof politicaleducation Teach-
ingPolitics,17, 3-10.
MARSHALL, T.H. (1963) Citizenshipand social class. In Sociology at theCrossroads.
(London, Heinemann).
McLAUGHLIN, T. and HALSTEAD, M. (1999) Education in characterand virtue.
In T. McLAUGHLIN and M. HALSTEAD (Eds) Educationin Morality (London,
Routledge).
MUNTON, T. and ZURAWAN,A. (2004) ActiveCommunities: HeadlineFindings from
the2003 HomeOffice Survey(London, Home Office).
Citizenship
NASH, R.J. (1997) Answeringthe 'Virtuecrats': a Moral Conversation on Character
Education(New York,TeachersCollege Press).
OSLER, A. (2003) The Crick Report and the futureof multiethnicBritain. In
L. GEARON (Ed.) Learningto TeachCitizenship in theSecondary School(London,
RoutledgeFalmer).
PUTNAM, R. (2000) BowlingAlone:theCollapseand RevivalofAmericanCommunity
(New York,Simon and Schuster).
REID, A. and WHITTINGHAM, B. (1984) The constitutional classroom:a political
educationfordemocracy,Teaching Politics,13 (3), 307-330.
SEARS, A. (2001) Crisisand citizenshipeducation. Paper presentedat the confer-
ence DiverseCitizenships? London MetropolitanUniversity, May.
STEVENS, O. (1982) Children Talking PoliticalLearningin Childhood
Politics: (Oxford,
MartinRobertson).
STEWART,M. (1938) Bias and EducationforDemocracy (Oxford,OxfordUniversity
Press).
STRADLING, R. (1987) Politicaleducation and politicisationin Britain:a ten year
retrospective.Paper presentedat theinternational round tableconferenceofthe

357
? BlackwellPublishingLtd. and SES 2005

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 CITIZENSHIPEDUCATIONAND CHARACTER
EDUCATION

researchcommitteeon politicaleducation of the InternationalPoliticalScience

Association,OstkollegderBundeszentralefurPolitischeBildung,K61ln,9-13 March.
STRADLING, R., NOCTOR, M. and BAINES, B. (1984) TeachingControversial Issues
(London, EdwardArnold).
TORNEY-PURTA, J., LEHMANN, R., OSWALD, H. and SCHULZ, W. (2001)
and Educationin Twenty-Eight
Citizenship Countries:CivicKnowledge and Engagement
at Age14 (Amsterdam,IEA).
TRAFFORD, B. (1993) SharingPowerin Schools:RaisingStandards(Ticknall,Educa-
tion Now).
UNGOED-THOMAS,J. (1997) TheVisions ofa School:theGoodSchoolin theGoodSociety
(London, Cassell).
WERNER,E.E. and SMITH, R.S. (1992) Overcoming theOdds:HighRiskChildren from
BirthtoAdulthood (Ithaca, NY,Cornell University Press).
WHITE, C., BRUCE, S. and RITCHIE, J. (2000) Young People'sPolitics:
PoliticalInterest
and Engagement Amongst 14 to24 YearOlds (York,JosephRowntreeFoundation).
WHITELEY, P. (2004) A HealthCheckforBritishDemocracy: whatdo we knowabout
and itseffects
participation in Britain?(Swindon,Economic and Social Research
Council).
WOODWARD, V. (2004) ActiveLearning, (London, Home Office).
ActiveCitizenship.
WILLIAMS, D.D., YANCHAR,S.C.,JENSEN,L.C. and LEWIS, C. (2003) Character
education in a public high school: a multi-yearinquiryinto unified studies,
JournalofMoralEducation,32 (1), 1-33.

Correspondence
Dr Ian Davies
Departmentof EducationalStudies
UniversityofYork
Heslington
York
YO10 5DD
Email: id5@york.ac.uk

358
? Blackwell Ltd.and SES 2005
Publishing

This content downloaded from 181.135.66.184 on Mon, 20 Jan 2014 08:46:36 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions