Journal of Social Science Education Volume 16, Number 3, Fall 2017 DOI 10.2390/jsse-v16-i3-1582 Ben Kisby ‘Politics is ethics done in public’: Exploring Linkages and Disjunctions between Citizenship Education and Character Education in England* - A comprehensive discussion of the development of both forms of education in England. - A detailed examination of how both forms of education ought to be understood. - A careful analysis of the similarities and differences between these forms of education. Purpose: This article explores linkages and disjunctions between citizenship education and character education in England. Approach: The article undertakes a theoretical discussion of what both forms of education are and involve, and a historical overview of their development over the past twenty years, utilising a wide range of primary and secondary sources. Findings: Citizenship education programmes tend to place much greater emphasis than character education on the development of the necessary knowledge and skills that enable participation in political and democratic activities. The focus of character education is on personal ethics rather than public ethics, and the particular understanding of character education advanced by British politicians has been narrow and instrumental, linking the development of character with individual ‘success’, especially in the jobs market. Research implications: Comparative research is now needed to examine the strengths and weaknesses of these two forms of education as they are delivered in other countries, and to explore the similarities and differences between the experiences of different countries. Practical implications: Policy-makers concerned to ensure that young people have the knowledge, skills, values and attitudes they need to engage in civic and political activity should focus on programmes of citizenship education rather than character education. Keywords: Citizenship education, character education, England, social capital, political participation 1 Introduction Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition and second, a The late Bernard Crick made clear in his classic study In single party Conservative government, citizenship edu- Defence of Politics, first published in 1962, his view that cation has declined in significance to policy-makers and politics is a branch of ethics done in public, in which character education has risen in importance on the experience plays a central role (Crick, 1992). For Crick – political agenda. who chaired the Advisory Group on Citizenship, whose The article argues that character education has the report (DfEE/QCA, 1998) led to the introduction of potential to contribute to citizenship education through citizenship in the National Curriculum in England – the cultivation of the character of the active citizen. It politics is best defined as the activity of citizens freely also, however, draws attention to important differences debating public policy, and where differing interests in between citizenship education and character education. society are conciliated peacefully (see Crick, 1992; see In particular, that citizenship education, unlike character also Flinders, 2012).1 This article examines the develop- education, places, or ought to place, great emphasis on ment of both citizenship education and character edu- the development of appropriate knowledge and skills, cation in England in recent years, setting out also how not just values and attitudes, among young people; that both forms of education ought best to be understood. It the focus of character education is on personal ethics makes clear that whereas during New Labour’s years in rather than public ethics, and with addressing important power citizenship education came to prominence, in the moral or political issues at the level of the individual period since 2010, in which the UK has seen first, a rather than at any other level. The article argues that the particular understanding of character education ad- Dr Ben Kisby is a Senior Lecturer in Politics at the vanceed by British politicians is narrow and instrumental, University of Lincoln. He has published a number of linking the development of character with individual articles, book chapters and a monograph on ‘success’, in particular, in the jobs market. It concludes citizenship education. He co-convenes the Political that this reflects the government’s focus on pupils and Studies Association’s Young People’s Politics specialist students as future workers and consumers in a com- research group with James Sloam, Jacqui Briggs and petitive global economy, rather than ensuring that young Emily Rainsford. School of Social & Political Sciences, people are equipped to play a part in the democratic University of Lincoln. Brayford Pool, Lincoln, process so as to address issues of general concern Lincolnshire, UK. LN6 7TS through collective action. Email: [email protected] 8 Journal of Social Science Education Volume 16, Number 3, Fall 2017 ISSN 1618–5293 2 Understanding citizenship education From the perspective advanced in this article, demo- Citizenship is an ‘essentially contested concept’ and, as cracies need active and informed citizens, willing and such, citizenship education is a contested subject (Crick, able to play a part in the democratic process so as to 2000, p. 3; Lister, 1997, p. 3; Miller, 2000, p. 82).2 At a safeguard and bolster democratic principles. Citizenship basic level, citizenship can be defined in terms of an indi- education seeks to address issues of general concern vidual’s membership of a state or of a political commu- through collective action. It is important as a means of nity of some kind and the legal and moral rights and connecting young people to the political system, helping duties that this membership gives rise to. Citizenship them make sense of a complex political world and then has legal dimensions, relating to both national and thereby strengthening democracy. As such, citizenship international law, defining who are and who are not education can be defined as a subject that is or ought to citizens and who are and who are not accorded legal and be concerned to provide students with knowledge and other rights, and normative aspects, being concerned to understanding of political ideas and concepts, and local, specify how an individual citizen should behave and what regional, national and international political processes it is about their behaviour that should be regarded as and institutions; to develop students’ skills so as to admirable or worthy of criticism. It can also be seen as enable them to engage in decision-making, critical think- relating to individual and group identities, to citizens’ ing, debate, and (in ways of their own choosing) to possession of particular values and virtues and their participate effectively in political and democratic active- rights and responsibilities, broadly conceived. ties inside and outside school; and to instil in students Citizenship is a concept regularly invoked in discussions particular values and attitudes which make it likely they surrounding globalization, immigration, asylum and will want to engage in such activities (Kisby & Sloam, nationality. It may be seen as ‘a multi-layered construct’ 2009, pp. 316-319). Schools can and should act as mini- (Yuval-Davis, 2000, p. 117, see also Yuval-Davis, 1999) – polities, formative arenas for expression and civic en- and some postmodern thinkers have been concerned to gagement, for practice in social relations and in dealing deconstruct citizenship, analysing the signs and symbols with authority (Flanagan et al., 2007). that they argue give the concept meaning (e.g. Wexler, Citizenship classes are most effective when they are 1990). Certainly citizenship ‘is not an eternal essence but underpinned by the core principles of experiential and a cultural artefact. It is what people make of it’ (Van service learning, whereby knowledge, participation and Gunsteren, 1998, p. 11) and it has ‘multiple meanings’ deliberation are linked together in the promotion of (Van Gunsteren, 1998, p. 13), giving rise to a variety of active citizenship (see Kisby & Sloam, 2009). Experiential different perspectives. As such, a definitive conception of learning emphasises the vital role experience plays in citizenship must remain endlessly elusive. Nevertheless, learning and stresses the importance of the nature of it can be given a more concrete meaning, insofar as it is these experiences and is contrasted with more passive, possible to understand modern conceptions of the didactic forms of learning. It seeks both to connect citizen and debates about the meaning and nature of learning to students’ past experiences and promotes the citizenship as deriving from two historical traditions: notion of students actively and collaboratively engaging liberal and republican citizenship, with the former em- in participative activities that address issues that are phasising citizens’ rights and the latter their civic duties, relevant to their own lives – to facilitate what educa- and there are important contemporary debates around, tionalists have described as ‘deep learning’ (Ramsden for example, cosmopolitan, communitarian, multicul- 2003). The development of knowledge and skills is tural, ecological and feminist conceptions of citizenship, facilitated through performance (Kolb, 1984), enabling which seek in different ways to critique and/or build on learners to link theory with practice, to develop their these two core traditions.3 own questions and find their own answers. Service Leaving aside those who are against citizenship edu- learning is concerned to develop skills for both life and cation,4 there are considerable differences of opinion work, and promotes student participation in work-based regarding the appropriate content of citizenship lessons learning concerned with achieving public goods, and and modes of delivery to students amongst those who unlike simple volunteering, when done well, should are in favour. The article is concerned principally with emphasise the importance of participants critically citizenship lessons in secondary schools and colleges,5 as reflecting on and analysing the activities undertaken opposed to primary or higher education, or to forms of (Crick, 2004, p. 83). citizenship education for immigrants that are designed to So citizenship education is not about attempting to enable non-citizens to become citizens. Whilst empirical create ‘perfect’ or ‘model’ citizens. It should certainly be studies can shed important light on the effectiveness or very concerned with issues around rights and pluralism in otherwise of particular forms of citizenship education, the contemporary world – key liberal preoccupations. these issues are clearly, to a large extent, normative, But if the aim is to promote a form of citizenship since any attempt to address them necessarily relies on education that enables and encourages students to think various assumptions about what the aims of citizenship critically about contemporary issues and to engage education should be and how these objectives should actively in political and civic participation so as to address manifest themselves in the citizenship syllabus, the role such matters, as well as to protect and promote rights of schools, teachers and students, and so on. rather than to merely be aware of already existing legal rights, then it ought also to be informed by a conception 9 Journal of Social Science Education Volume 16, Number 3, Fall 2017 ISSN 1618–5293 of citizenship that owes a great deal to the republican individuals and society of community activity’ (DfEE/QCA, tradition, in which citizenship is conceived of primarily as 1998, p. 4). an activity rather than a status (see Oldfield, 1990; The Advisory Group on Citizenship (AGC) published its Marquand, 1997, ch.2). Citizenship education should report, Education for Citizenship and the Teaching of inculcate among young people a respect for others and a Democracy in Schools, in September 1998 and was one of rejection of all forms of discrimination, for example, on the immediate causes of the inclusion of citizenship in racist, sexist, homophobic or religious grounds, and the National Curriculum. The AGC’s report provided the should involve students discussing and addressing real, framework for citizenship education in England. It concrete issues and events in personal, local, national defined citizenship education in terms of three strands – and international contexts. social and moral responsibility, community involvement and political literacy: 3 Citizenship education in England The history of citizenship education in England can be “1. Social and moral responsibility – learning from the very traced back a long way – perhaps to 1934 and the for- beginning self-confidence and socially and morally respon- mation of the Association for Education in Citizenship, sible behaviour both in and beyond the classroom, both which aimed to teach the children of ordinary people, towards those in authority and towards each other; and not just public school elites, about the merits of 2. Community involvement – learning and becoming help- liberal democracy and the dangers of totalitarianism fully involved in the life and concerns of their communities, including learning through community involvement and (Whitmarsh, 1974). In fact, some scholars trace political service to the community; education in Britain back as far as the late eighteenth 3. Political literacy – learning about and how to make them- and early nineteenth centuries, to the university selves effective in public life though knowledge, skills and education of aspiring elites, which included some values’ (DfEE/QCA, 1998, pp. 11-13). instruction in political leadership and patriotism (Batho, 1990; Heater, 2002; Mycock, 2004). Citizenship edu- Citizenship education was introduced in England prin- cation became part of the non-statutory personal, social cipally because of concerns held by a range of actors, and health education framework at primary level and a including politicians, academics and pressure groups statutory subject in secondary schools in England in constituting an ideational policy network, about what 2000, with the statutory provision taking effect at the they perceived as a decline in levels of social capital in start of the academic year in 2002 so that schools had Britain (see Kisby, 2007, 2012). Such individuals and time to prepare. Prior to this, citizenship lessons had groups were particularly influenced by the neo- never been compulsory in English schools, although Tocquevillian conception of social capital advanced by citizenship had been one of five non-compulsory, cross- the US political scientist Robert Putnam, for whom the curricular themes of the National Curriculum since 1990 concept refers to the social networks, such as networks (NCC, 1990a, 1990b). of friends and neighbours and organizations like trade The decision to introduce citizenship as a statutory unions, churches, and schools, and the norms and trust foundation subject in the National Curriculum was made that such networks give rise to, which he argues allow clear by the incoming Labour government in its first citizens to work together to achieve collective goals Education White Paper, Excellence in Schools, published (Putnam, 2000; Putnam, Leonardi & Nanetti, 1993). two months after the general election in May 1997.6 The Blunkett, for example, argued that the state must enable White Paper announced the formation of ‘an advisory citizens to lead autonomous lives, especially through group to discuss citizenship and the teaching of demo- citizenship education. For Blunkett, ‘it is clear that weak cracy’ in schools (DfEE, 1997, p. 63). Later that year the civic engagement and an absence of social capital then Education Secretary, David Blunkett, announced deprives democracy of its vitality, health and legitimacy’ that the group would be chaired by the political theorist (Blunkett, 2001, p. 26). Blunkett argued for greater civic and commentator Bernard Crick, one of the leading involvement by citizens, which, for him, required action figures who had been pushing for the different but on the part of the state to enable citizens to lead related subject of political education in schools since the autonomous lives, especially through education for 1970s. However, Blunkett’s view was that political edu- citizenship (Blunkett, 2001, pp. 26-29). Blunkett argued: cation had too narrow an emphasis (Pollard, 2004, p. ‘If autonomy is dependent on education, and a fully 262), being preoccupied with political literacy (Crick & autonomous person is also by definition an active citizen, Heater, 1977; Crick & Porter, 1978), and that citizenship then there needs to be explicit education for citizenship education ought to be concerned more generally with in the school and college curriculum’ (Blunkett, 2001, p. how children should be taught to be citizens, and this 29). was reflected in the terms of reference given to the The impact of the concept of social capital on the group, which was asked: citizenship education initiative can also be seen in the ‘To provide advice on effective education for citizen- normative presuppositions underpinning the AGC report ship in schools – to include the nature and practices of (Kisby, 2009). The normative model of citizenship that participation in democracy; the duties, responsibilities best corresponds to Putnam’s concerns can be described and rights of individuals as citizens; and the value to as a ‘republican-communitarian’ model, broadly of the kind developed by Michael Sandel (Sandel, 1996, 1998). 10 Journal of Social Science Education Volume 16, Number 3, Fall 2017 ISSN 1618–5293 This is a model that seeks to promote both civic and Gove, then Shadow Education Secretary, criticised the political participation and which also emphasises citizens’ ‘politically motivated’ National Curriculum, singling out community membership as the primary constitutive specifically the requirement for schools to teach citi- attachment upon citizens. The principal aims of citizen- zenship, asking: ‘When it comes to citizenship, commu- ship education in England, as set out in the AGC report, nity cohesion and a sense of national solidarity, why is it are to teach young people to become well informed, that we imagine a particular subject put on the National responsible citizens engaged in mainstream political and Curriculum can address these deep and long standing civic activities, such as voting, and undertaking voluntary challenges?’ (Paton, 2009). The following year, in a work, in particular, at a local community level. speech to the Conservative Party conference in October Keith Ajegbo’s review of diversity and citizenship in the 2010, Gove, now Education Secretary, had said: curriculum (DfES, 2007), published in January 2007 and ‘We urgently need to ensure our children study welcomed by the Government (see, for example, rigorous disciplines instead of pseudo-subjects. Other- Johnson, 2007), provided impetus to teaching about di- wise we will be left behind… Our children will never out- versity, emphasising the importance of school children strip the global competition unless we know our exams learning about national, regional, ethnic and religious can compete with the best in the world…how many of cultures and their connections, and exploring the our students are learning the lessons of history? One of concept of community cohesion.7 The Ajegbo report was the under-appreciated tragedies of our time has been consistent with New Labour concerns around patriotism the sundering of our society from its past. Children are and national identity and it marked an important shift of growing up ignorant of one of the most inspiring stories I emphasis for citizenship lessons in England. The call by know – the history of our United Kingdom’ (Gove, 2010). Gordon Brown (2006) and others for a greater focus on It was widely believed that Gove’s reference to ‘Britishness’ and ‘British’ values (for a discussion, see ‘pseudo-subjects’ included citizenship education (Chong Andrews & Mycock, 2008) sparked a debate about the et al., 2016, p. 120). Indeed it was reported in the press meaning of citizenship in the UK and led to the in October 2012 that the government had considered Goldsmith report on citizenship (Goldsmith, 2008). Its removing citizenship education from the National reform proposals focused only on symbolic measures to Curriculum, but decided against this so as to avoid having strengthen British citizenship, such as citizenship cere- to introduce new legislation to do so (Grimston & monies, and efforts to support volunteering, although it Lightfoot, 2012, p. 2). Nevertheless, despite retaining also led to the establishment of the Youth Citizenship citizenship in the National Curriculum, there was a clear Commission, which has undertaken much needed desire by the government to revise the Citizenship pro- research on young people’s understandings of citizenship gramme of study. A draft was produced in February 2013 and on how to increase levels of political participation for consultation (DfE, 2013a). This was widely regarded (YCC, 2009; see also Mycock & Tonge, 2014). by citizenship education campaigners as very proble- The general election in May 2010 led to the formation matic, underpinned by a highly individualised, consu- of a Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition govern- merist agenda – focusing on teaching about personal ment, and following this it looked for a long time as if finance and financial services and products but not citizenship would be removed as a compulsory subject in providing students with knowledge about public finance the National Curriculum. Indeed this was the re- and economic decision-making more broadly, for commendation of the Curriculum Review Panel set up by example. It also seemed to regard active citizenship as the coalition government in January 2011. The panel’s entirely synonymous with volunteering and was very report was published in December 2011 and it took the unclear in its guidance about human rights teaching, very questionable view that citizenship is not a distinct amongst other issues. Having successfully campaigned subject as such and therefore its compulsory status in for the retention of citizenship in the National the National Curriculum should be revoked (DfE, 2011). Curriculum, the Democratic Life coalition also managed Given that the stated purpose of citizenship lessons was to positively impact on the programme of study (Jerome, to increase levels of civic engagement and given that the 2014), with the final revised curriculum clearly an evidence clearly suggested it was having some success in improvement on what had been initially proposed, this regard (see e.g. Keating et al., 2010),8 the logic of the although these issues were not fully addressed (compare panel seems rather peculiar (Whiteley, 2014, p. 531). To DfE, 2013a with DfE, 2013b). the surprise of many,9 in February 2013 the then Following the consultation, the new slimmed-down Education Secretary, Michael Gove, rejected the panel’s citizenship curriculum was then finalised and published recommendation and made it clear that citizenship in September 2013 and has been taught in schools in would be retained as a statutory foundation subject at England since September 2014. The National Curriculum secondary school level (Gove, 2013), although un- for Citizenship at key stages 3 and 4 sets out the fortunately a great deal of momentum that had following purpose of study: previously built up behind citizenship education was lost during the two years of uncertainty, as it was widely “A high-quality citizenship education helps to provide believed Gove did not support citizenship lessons. For pupils with knowledge, skills and understanding to prepare example, in a speech to the Association of Teachers and them to play a full and active part in society. In particular, Lecturers annual conference in Liverpool in April 2009, citizenship education should foster pupils’ keen awareness 11 Journal of Social Science Education Volume 16, Number 3, Fall 2017 ISSN 1618–5293 and understanding of democracy, government and how ‘human flourishing’ – requires above all the exercise of laws are made and upheld. Teaching should equip pupils virtue. Citizens can become virtuous only through the with the skills and knowledge to explore political and social cultivation of certain customs or habits of behaviour. For issues critically, to weigh evidence, debate and make Aristotle: reasoned arguments. It should also prepare pupils to take their place in society as responsible citizens, manage their money well and make sound financial decisions’ (DfE, “Virtue of character [i.e., of êthos] results from habit 2013b, p. 214). [ethos]; hence its name ‘ethical’, slightly varied from ‘ethos’. Hence it is also clear that none of the virtues of cha- And the following are the aims of the programme of racter arises in us naturally. For if something is by nature in one condition, habituation cannot bring it into another study for pupils, who should: condition…That is why we must perform the right activities, since differences in these imply corresponding differences “- acquire a sound knowledge and understanding of how in the states. It is not unimportant, then, to acquire one the United Kingdom is governed, its political system and sort of habit or another, right from our youth. On the con- how citizens participate actively in its democratic systems trary, it is very important, indeed all-important’ (Aristotle, of government 1999, pp. 18-19). - develop a sound knowledge and understanding of the role of law and the justice system in our society and how laws Good conduct requires training to instil these habits. are shaped and enforced So, Aristotle argues, ethics is a profoundly practical - develop an interest in, and commitment to, participation discipline that is absolutely essential for ensuring that in volunteering as well as other forms of responsible young people develop various virtuous character traits, activity, that they will take with them into adulthood such as truthfulness, integrity and determination. For - are equipped with the skills to think critically and debate political questions, to enable them to manage their money Aristotle, the moral virtues represent a ‘golden mean’ on a day-to-day basis, and plan for future financial needs’ between two extremes of excess and deficiency. For (DfE, 2013b, p. 214). example, courage is a virtue, but in excess would be reck- lessness and in deficiency, cowardice. Such qualities, Although better than the initial draft, the new citizen- Aristotle believes, do not develop naturally in children ship curriculum still represented a significant change without such training. It is important to emphasize that from the three core strands set out in the Advisory Group while, for Aristotle, the virtues – the practice of acting or on Citizenship’s 1998 report, with a shift away from a behavioural dispositions to act in particular ways – focus on understanding political concepts and civic and require a vitally important role for habits, these habits political participation towards constitutional history and are certainly not intended to promote among citizens financial literacy, and an even greater emphasis on lives of mindless routine. Quite the opposite. Aristotle voluntary work. Moreover, whereas previously the acqui- makes clear that virtue is not concerned with passive sition of civic knowledge was linked with the develop- habituation, but rather reflection and action on the part ment of active citizenship, the government now pro- of citizens, who choose to behave virtuously. This is what motes volunteerism instead, especially through the constitutes good character. The point here, as Broadie National Citizen Service (see http://www.ncsyes.co.uk/). says, is that: In addition, although citizen-ship remained a compulsory subject in the National Curriculum, Academies and Free “Forming a habit is connected with repetition, but where Schools – the expansion in numbers of which has been what is repeated are (for example) just acts, habituation very strongly encouraged and supported by the go- cannot be a mindless process, and the habit (once formed) vernment – have been given the freedom to, amongst of acting justly cannot be blind in its operations, since one other things, opt out of following the National needs intelligence to see why different things are just under Curriculum. At the same time, the development of the different circumstances. So far as habit plays a part, it is not English Baccalaureate (EBacc) and the focus on the that of autopilot, where we take for granted that we know (without special monitoring) what to do to get to the des- EBacc subjects (English, mathematics, history, geography, tination; rather, the moral habit is one by which it can be the sciences, languages) has had the effect of under- taken for granted that whatever we are going to do, it will mining the National Curriculum and non-EBacc subjects, be what we find appropriate’ (Broadie, 1991, p. 109, such as citizenship. As a result of these developments, emphasis in original). along with, as will be discussed later in the article, the rise in prominence of character education, citizenship So, Aristotle believes, education for character requires education in England has been sidelined to a significant practical experience; of citizens learning through habit extent, having clearly declined in importance to policy- rather than simply through reasoning, and through this makers in recent years following the change of govern- training they can come to recognise how they should live ment in 2010. and are able to live in such a way. They gain the ex- perience and accompanying skills that inculcate in them 4 Understanding character education the dispositions of good character. The notion of ‘education for character’ can be traced all Aristotle is certainly an appropriate philosopher to dis- the way back to the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle cuss in this context as some forms of character education (384-322 BCE), who argued that the ‘good life’ – a life of in the UK, the US and elsewhere are of a distinctly 12 Journal of Social Science Education Volume 16, Number 3, Fall 2017 ISSN 1618–5293 Aristotelian nature.10 So character education is a form of below, interestingly, the leading centre for the pro- education that seeks to cultivate students’ social and motion of character education in the UK, the Jubilee emotional development, with schools focusing not only Centre for Character and Virtues at the University of on the academic success of their students but also their Birmingham, defines character in terms of four cate- attitudes, beliefs, behaviour, values and virtues; their gories of virtues, rather than values.11 Character educa- students’ individual characters. The notion is that schools tion programmes, such as those developed by the Jubilee have a vital role to play in helping develop well-rounded Centre, focus on developing in young people various young people; young people of ‘good character’. But how character traits, which are often quite wide-ranging and should we define ‘character’? The American develop- not focused only on moral reasoning. Traits such as mental psychologist Thomas Lickona provides the follow- perseverance, confidence and motivation (which could, ing definition: of course, in practice underpin amoral or immoral as well as moral behaviour) are promoted; the notion being that “Character consists of operative values, values in action. We such traits, sometimes described as ‘soft skills’, are progress in our character as a value becomes a virtue, a important for success in education and work – and this reliable inner disposition to respond to situations in a morally latter focus has very much been that of a number of good way. Character so conceived has three interrelated politicians and educationalists in the UK and the US, as parts: moral knowing, moral feeling, and moral behaviour. will be set out in the section that follows. So con- Good character consists of knowing the good, desiring the temporary character education is concerned then with good, and doing the good – habits of the mind, habits of the both the teaching of good character and accompanying heart, and habits of action…When we think about the kind of moral issues, and with teaching for effective learning and character we want for our children, it’s clear that we want the instilling of traits for success in life more generally. them to be able to judge what is right, care deeply about what is right, and then do what they believe to be right – even in the face of pressure from without and temptation 5 Character education in England from within’ (Lickona, 1991, p. 51, emphasis in original). The history of character education in the UK arguably dates back to the ideas of key figures in the Scottish It should be noted that these three different ‘inter- Enlightenment who believed that human character could related parts’ are given different degrees of emphasis in be altered through changes to the environment in which different programmes of character education that are it developed (Arthur, 2003, p. 145). Arthur emphasises developed by different individuals and organisations. It the importance attached to character education by should also be said that various different labels have progressive political and educational thinkers, although been attached to forms of education that are concerned also notes ‘the activities of some conservative evan- with addressing ethical issues, the teaching of values and gelicals in the nineteenth century’ (Arthur, 2003, p. 147). virtues, and the moral development of students, such as He draws particular attention to the work of the virtues education, values education and moral education. industrialist and social and educational reformer, Robert It is possible to make distinctions between character Owen, and his Institute for the Formation of Character. education and these forms of education. However, there The Institute opened in 1816 and was used both as a are significant similarities between these kinds of school for young people and to provide adult education education and, in the contemporary context, any dis- to the working classes, and was underpinned by Owen’s tinctions that one makes are likely to be problematic and belief that individuals are shaped by their environment open to challenge as character education has become a and above all by their education. Arthur also points to rather broad field, arguably encompassing these differ- the work of ‘the secular humanists in the late Victorian rent forms of education to a significant extent. Today, era and thence the progressives in moral education in character education is very diverse, so generalisations the early part of the twentieth century’, for whom about, say, the role of theory, ideology, the nature of ‘character development’ was seen ‘as part of a process in pedagogical approaches used and so on are not really reforming society’ (Arthur, 2003, p. 147). possible – there are forms of character education, for The recent history of character education in England example, that are driven by religious and/or conservative should perhaps be traced back to the creation of the ideologies that make use of hierarchical methods, and National Curriculum, following the Education Reform Act approaches that are much more liberal in terms of of 1988. This had helped promote the idea of uni- promoting individual autonomy and critical thinking versalism, of all children being taught some of the same among students. core subjects. The Act places a duty on all state schools One aspect that many forms of contemporary charac- to promote the ‘spiritual, moral, cultural, mental and ter education tend to have in common is a focus on the physical development of pupils at the school and of teaching of values that are regarded as widely shared society’ and to prepare ‘pupils for the opportunities, within society. A key aim of character education is then responsibilities and experiences of adult life’ (HMSO, to enable students, informed by these values, to make 1988, p. 1). ‘Character’ is not explicitly mentioned, but ethical judgements between the morally right and wrong the aim here clearly is to prepare young people for their course of action in given situations and to develop the adult lives as moral citizens. Against a background of character to do the right thing; to take the ethically concern about a perceived decline in moral standards, in correct course of action. However, as will be discussed particular amongst young people, the School Curriculum 13 Journal of Social Science Education Volume 16, Number 3, Fall 2017 ISSN 1618–5293 and Assessment Authority (SCAA) convened a National continuities in this area since 2010 and the election of Forum for Values in Education and the Community in the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition, followed by England, which was chaired by Marianne Talbot, a the election of the Conservatives in 2015 and 2017. philosophy lecturer at Oxford University, who later The importance of character-building for British policy- became a member of the Advisory Group on Citizenship. makers increased significantly after 2010. Following the The 1996 SCAA conference ‘Education for Adult Life: the riots and looting in parts of the country in August 2011, Spiritual and Moral Development of Young People’ the then Prime Minister, David Cameron, argued that this considered how spiritual and moral development could was ‘not about poverty…No, this was about be promoted through school subjects and through the behaviour…people showing indifference to right and ethos of the school (see SCAA, 1996). Arguably, this focus wrong…people with a twisted moral code…people with a on the importance of values and young people’s moral complete absence of self-restraint’ (Cameron, 2011a). In development impacted on the form of citizenship edu- a speech the following month, Cameron made clear his cation introduced by the Labour government (see Kisby, view that ‘education doesn’t just give people the tools to 2012, esp. ch.7). make a good living – it gives them the character to live a Labour came to power in 1997 and in its White Paper, good life, to be good citizens. So, for the future of our Excellence in Schools, argued that there was a need for economy, and for the future of our society, we need a pupils ‘to appreciate and understand the moral code on first-class education for every child’ (Cameron, 2011b). which civilised society is based and to appreciate the The then Education Secretary, Michael Gove, showed culture and background of others’. In addition, pupils some interest in the importance of schoolchildren ‘need to develop the strength of character and attitudes learning ‘grit’. For example, in February 2014 he claimed: to life and work, such as responsibility, determination, ‘As top heads and teachers already know, sports clubs, care and generosity, which will enable them to become orchestras and choirs, school plays, cadets, debating citizens of a successful democratic society’ (DfEE, 1997, competitions, all help to build character and instil grit, to p. 10). A couple of years later, in the new National give children’s talents an opportunity to grow and to Curriculum 2000 for England, the government stated that allow them to discover new talents they never knew they it recognised ‘a broad set of common values and had’ (Gove, 2014). However, it was Nicky Morgan, purposes that underpin the school curriculum and the Education Secretary until her sacking in Theresa May’s work of schools’ (DfEE, 1999, p. 10), and the ‘Statement reshuffle in July 2016, and who had taken over from of Values, Aims and Purposes of the National Curriculum Gove two years earlier, who has most enthusiastically for England’ includes the following: ‘the development of embraced character education within government, children’s social responsibility, community involvement, particularly as a means of promoting social mobility for the development of effective relationships, knowledge those from under-privileged backgrounds. For her, and understanding of society, participation in the affairs instilling character and resilience ‘is part of our core of society, respect for others, and the child’s contribution mission to deliver real social justice by giving all children, to the building up of the common good’. The values regardless of background, the chance to fulfil their underpinning the school curriculum are the ‘commitment potential and achieve their high aspirations’ (DfE, to the virtues of truth, justice, honesty, trust and a sense 2015a).12 of duty’ (DfEE, 1999, pp. 10-11). Moreover, in its Green Developments in the UK have been impacted on by paper, Schools: Building on Success, the government initiatives elsewhere, particularly in the US, such as the argued that: ‘Character building is a key part of an overall well-known Knowledge is Power Programme (KIPP). KIPP approach to education which values scholarship, schools are college preparatory schools that operate in endeavour and the idea of a citizen of the future who is deprived areas in the US and which place character self-reliant and simultaneously able to contribute to the development at the heart of their ethos. In addition, in wider community’ (DfEE, 2001, p. 16). Following on from recent years a number of bestselling books by various Labour’s Every Child Matters strategy (TSO, 2003), the north American authors have been published extolling Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning (SEAL) the benefits of the cultivation of character, such as the programme was introduced as part of the Secondary US-Canadian Paul Tough’s How Children Succeed (Tough, National Strategy in 2007 (see DCSF, 2007). This aimed to 2013), the American Carol Dweck’s Mindset (Dweck, assist the development of social and emotional skills in 2012), and the American Angela Duckworth’s Grit schools. Evaluations of SEAL, however, suggested that at (Duckworth, 2016), and these have also fed into the the primary level it had mixed effects on outcomes and discourse of British policy-makers.13 Morgan made at the secondary level it had no impact (Humphrey et al., character education a key priority of hers and in 2008, 2010). It would seem then that the development of December 2014 the Department for Education (DfE) ‘character’ among young people, sometimes explicit, announced the creation of a substantial grant scheme to sometimes implicit, was important for Labour during its encourage character-building activities (DfE, 2014). period in government between 1997 and 2010. Morgan has said the development of young people’s Nevertheless, it must be emphasised that this was for a characters, including their ‘grit’ and ‘resilience’ are particular purpose, namely the development of absolutely essential for young people’s future ‘success’. responsible and active citizenship, and it is important to For her: note the discontinuities as much, if not more than, the 14 Journal of Social Science Education Volume 16, Number 3, Fall 2017 ISSN 1618–5293 ”These traits are key to succeeding in life and I want to advocates of the KIPP schools and of various high profile ensure that we are creating the conditions for everyone to authors writing in this area. Nevertheless, the proactively gain them…That is at the heart of our drive to understanding of character education advanced by some ensure England is a global leader in character education – individuals and organisations, such as the Jubilee Centre, helping every school and pupil to be the best they can is broader than that advanced by Morgan, Hunt and be…we want schools to focus on this area because we know others. The Jubilee Centre defines character as ‘a set of that character, resilience and grit are traits that everyone, personal traits or dispositions that produce specific moral adults and children alike, can improve and build on and that emotions, inform motivation and guide conduct’ (Jubilee doing so will help them in later life…All young people Centre for Character and Virtues, undated), and it deserve the opportunity to develop the confidence, identifies four main categories of good character: ‘Moral motivation and resilience that will not only complement their academic studies, but will also prepare them for virtues, including courage, justice, honesty, compassion, success in their adult lives’ (Morgan, 2016). gratitude, humility and modesty; intellectual virtues, such as creativity and critical thinking; performance The DfE defines the ‘character traits, attributes and virtues, including resilience and determination; and civic behaviours that underpin success in education and work’ virtues, such as acts of service and volunteering’ (Jubilee as: ‘perseverance, resilience and grit; confidence and Centre for Character and Virtues, undated). The Jubilee optimism; motivation, drive and ambition; neighbor- Centre proposes a much more unambiguously liness and community spirit; tolerance and respect; Aristotelian understanding of character education. It honesty, integrity and dignity; conscientiousness, advances a virtue ethics approach in which the curiosity and focus’ (DfE, 2015b). It argues that: development of character is an end in itself, not simply a ‘Character education aims to allow pupils to emerge means to some other ends. from education better equipped to thrive in modern Britain’ (DfE, 2015b). 6 Exploring linkages and disjunctions Interestingly, politicians from across the political 6.1 Linkages spectrum in the UK have embraced character education. Character education has been subjected to a range of One of the most prominent supporters has been former criticisms, although some of these can be dismissed fairly Shadow Education Secretary, Tristram Hunt. Like quickly and easily since they rest on caricatures, Morgan, he has also expressed his commitment to stereotypes and unjustified generalisations (Kristjánsson, schools seeking to develop young people’s characters, 2013). For example, character education has been cri- and indeed Hunt has set out a vision for character ticised for being a form of indoctrination, for being education rather similar to Morgan’s. In a speech in driven by a religious and/or right-wing political agenda, February 2014, Hunt made clear that Labour wants, and for utilising hierarchical teaching methods. Character education can be done in such a way that amounts to “young people who are confident, determined and little more than a form of indoctrination, but then, so can citizenship education too. If done well, character edu- resilient; young people who display courage, compassion, honesty, integrity, fairness, perseverance, emotional in- cation should help young people to think critically and to telligence, grit and self-discipline. We want our young think for themselves. Character education can be driven people to have a sense of moral purpose and character, as by a religious and/or right-wing ideology, but this is not well as to be enquiring, reflective and passionate necessarily inherent within character education. Again, learners’ (Hunt, 2014a). character education can be taught using hierarchical methods or it can promote autonomy. The simple point As such, Hunt argues, ‘we should encourage all schools is that character education can be done well, or it can be to embed character education and resilience across their done badly, as with other forms of education, such as curriculum’ (Hunt, 2014a). For Hunt, the development of citizenship education. young people’s ‘characters’, alongside a focus also on The notion of teaching good character in schools will ‘literacy’, ‘numeracy’ and ‘creativity’ by schools, is sound rather Victorian to some. The extent to which it is essential for success ‘in an ever more competitive global even possible for schools to successfully teach character market-place’ (Hunt, 2014a; see also Hunt, 2014b). is open to question. Some psychologists argue that per- It is important to note that much of the focus of British sonality is largely genetically determined. But arguably politicians then has been on the promotion of traits like personality and character are not the same and character ‘resilience’ and skills for ‘success’ in education, work and is more open to change. Nevertheless, many argue that life. Although clearly not entirely unrelated to the notion character is best ‘caught’ indirectly rather than ‘taught’ of character development advanced by Aristotle briefly directly in schools, through activities such as school sketched out above, neither is such an emphasis entirely sports. Still further, some critics of character education coterminous with the Aristotelian notion of human do not reject the idea that character can be shaped but flourishing either. As summarised above, the DfE’s list of argue that the role of parents is far more important than key character traits is rather broader than simply schools. Yet schools inevitably promote values (Lickona, ‘resilience’ or ‘grit’, but politicians have tended to 1991, pp. 20-21; See & Arthur, 2011, p. 144). As such, promote a rather narrow, instrumental notion of they inevitably, directly or indirectly, engage in character character development, consistent with the discourse of development, so the question then becomes not: should 15 Journal of Social Science Education Volume 16, Number 3, Fall 2017 ISSN 1618–5293 schools teach character? But rather: how best can they have the cultivation of political knowledge and skills at do this? Moreover, arguably, since character education is their heart, such concerns are, at best, peripheral in concerned with important ethical issues and with character education programmes, which, as noted relations between people, it relates in a significant way earlier, tend to have a significantly different focus. to citizenship education (Davies, Gorard & McGuinn, While several of the criticisms commonly levelled at 2005, p. 343). forms of character education are unfair, there remain Both citizenship education and character education significant grounds for concern. In particular, even the have been presented by policy-makers, in a British more sophisticated forms of character education that are context, as a means of addressing perceived crises put forward fail to distinguish between the good person (Davies, Gorard & McGuinn, 2005, p. 342). In the case of and the good citizen or, as this article prefers to put it, citizenship education a concern about levels of social the active, effective citizen, which, as argued earlier, is capital, and in the case of character education a concern what citizenship education is or ought to be primarily about the moral outlook and behaviour of young people. concerned with developing. For example, for the Jubilee Earlier in the article, citizenship education was defined as Centre, in addition to the focus on individual morality a subject that is or ought to be concerned to do three and resilience, the concern of character education ought things. First, to provide students with appropriate to be with ‘acts of service and volunteering’ rather than knowledge and understanding and, second, skills, that active citizenship (Jubilee Centre for Character and enable them to participate effectively in various political Virtues, undated). One way to bring out a key difference and democratic activities inside and outside schools. between citizenship education and character education Third, attention was drawn to the need for particular is to reflect on the task the liberal political philosopher, values and attitudes to be instilled in young people such the late John Rawls, set himself in his well-known book, A that it is likely they will want to engage in such activities. Theory of Justice (Rawls, 1971), where he sought to shift It is this third strand – the cultivation of the character of the question from: how should I live? to: how can we live the active citizen – that character education has the together in society given that there are different answers potential to contribute most significantly to citizenship to the question: how should I live? Whatever the education. Knowledge and skills are not enough for the shortcomings of Rawls’s magnum opus, this latter development of active citizens. As stated earlier, in order question ought in my view to form an important part of for citizenship education to be delivered successfully, it is the framework within which citizenship education is vital that it is underpinned by the core principles of delivered in modern, highly diverse, pluralistic, liberal experiential and service learning. Knowledge and skills democratic societies (see Suissa, 2015, pp. 106-107). It is must be connected with participation and reflection by not that the former question is not also very important, young people on these experiences. Service learning can of course, and, as noted above, schools are necessarily in be used in both citizenship education and character the business of promoting values of one kind or another, education, providing young people with useful par- whether or not they explicitly deliver lessons in ticipatory experiences and aiding in character deve- character. But the point is that character education is lopment. Through discussion of difficult and contro- rather more concerned with the former than the latter versial political and moral issues and through civic and question because the starting point for its advocates, political participation, and critical reflection on such such as the Jubilee Centre, is virtue ethics, not liberal social action, students can develop the habits of active pluralism or republican active citizenship. As such, the citizenship. clear focus of character education is on personal ethics rather than public ethics, and with addressing important 6.2 Disjunctions moral or political issues at the level of the individual Character education is not the same as citizenship rather than at any other level. education. Nor does it represent a superior alternative to The focus on the individual is problematic for two citizenship education, if we are seeking an answer to the reasons. First, it is very weak as a means of making sense question: how best can schools prepare young people for of the world. Second, it places sole responsibility on their roles as citizens in the contemporary world? Cha- individuals for their position in society. In relation to this racter education has a part to play in schools and has a first claim, let us take as an example a major world event part to play specifically in supporting citizenship edu- in the last few years: the global financial crisis of 2007-8. cation, in particular, in helping facilitate the development Now, without wanting to understate the role of agency of attitudes conducive to civic and political participation. as part of an account of why the crisis happened, it is But while knowledge and skills are certainly not enough, important to emphasise that an adequate explanation an understanding of political institutions and processes, needs to do rather more than just highlight the moral and the development of the skills of political literacy, for failings of bankers.14 Such an analysis needs to examine a example, the ability to critically engage with political whole range of factors, such as the roles of and ideas and messages, remain vitally important. As noted relationships between markets, bankers, central bankers, above, generalisations about character education are governments, regulators and credit-rating agencies, as problematic because there are different programmes well as the ideas driving actors, the institutional cultures with different aims and objectives. Nevertheless, within which they operated, the role of incentivisation whereas forms of citizenship education, when done well, schemes within banks, and so on; in other words, various 16 Journal of Social Science Education Volume 16, Number 3, Fall 2017 ISSN 1618–5293 structural as well as agential causes. There is a clear community (or communities) rather than the state in danger that very simplistic understandings of significant addressing various societal challenges. And the recent events can arise when the focus is placed largely if not context here, of course, is dominated by austerity and entirely on personal ethics. significant cuts to public spending in the UK since 2010. In terms of the second claim, it should be said that it is The article has argued that the understanding of absolutely essential that society’s problems are not character education put forward by British politicians is turned into purely individual problems. The narrow and narrow and instrumental, seeking to link the instrumental form of character education advocated by development of character with individual ‘success’, in various British politicians, most notably former Education particular, in the jobs market. It emphasises the Secretary Nicky Morgan, has been linked with the individual, moral dimension of issues rather than the promotion of social mobility. While focusing on deve- collective, social side. It psychologises problems, rather loping ‘grit’ and ‘resilience’ can be empowering for some, than politicising them, aiming to instil ‘grit’ and concentrating on questions of individual character in ‘resilience’ in young people. The form of character relation to student ‘success’ is clearly problematic, education advanced offers a depoliticised notion of good ignoring entirely the enabling or constraining role of citizenship, reflecting the government’s focus on pupils social structure. Simply exhorting those from under- and students as future workers and consumers in a privileged backgrounds and/or who have suffered forms competitive global economy (e.g. Cameron, 2013; Gove, of discrimination to be confident about their life chances, 2011), rather than ensuring that young people have the when their experiences in life have taught them knowledge, skills, values and attitudes they need to otherwise, is unhelpful. Structural inequalities – affect- engage in civic and political activity so as to address ting, for example, the way resources or opportunities are important issues of concern to them. It is hard to avoid distributed – based on gender, class, ethnicity, disability the conclusion that for various British politicians, and etc. need to be seriously addressed. As regards economic others, the idea is not that young people should learn disparities, unless really meaningful action is taken by how to bring about social and political change, but rather the government to tackle issues of poverty and wealth that they should be compliant. They should simply accept and income inequality in British society then, given the things as they are, and focus on their ‘subjective well- very well established negative impact of these factors on being’ (Suissa, 2015, p. 107). The message seems to be: social mobility (see e.g. Wilkinson & Pickett, 2010, esp. be resilient. Put up with things. Don’t be political. Don’t ch.12), statements about the need for students to learn try and change the world. Change your attitude, your to be resilient, at best, ring hollow, and at worst are perspective. Change yourself instead. insulting, liable to be interpreted by many as suggesting This article concludes by returning to Aristotle, a key that poor people would be fine if only they were more figure for many advocates of character education virtuous. because of his view, as discussed earlier, that the good life requires the exercise of virtue. However, let us recall 7 Conclusion one of the best known of Aristotle’s sayings – that people Education for democracy is or ought to be a key aim of are ‘zoon politikons’ or ‘political animals’ or ‘political education (Crick, 2004). Citizenship education em- beings’. Aristotle does at times suggest that individual, phasises the importance of students becoming well- private reflection on truth represents one way in which informed about political issues, as well as being public humans can realise their highest rational nature. Yet spirited, critical and independent-minded. This article has elsewhere he is clear that citizens are necessarily social argued that the cultivation of character is necessary, but creatures, not simply engaging in contemplative activities far from sufficient, for the preparation of young people but rather that in order to live well they must live in for their roles as citizens in the contemporary world. public, political relationships with others.15 Certainly, for Character education can support citizenship education, Aristotle, the good citizen must also be a good person.16 but even the more sophisticated forms, such as that But he argues that it is through their civic activities in the advanced by the Jubilee Centre, are not appropriate as polis that citizens organise society, or at least are capable an alternative because of the focus on personal rather of organising society, according to their views about how than public ethics, which can lead to the individualisation just and rational particular social arrangements are, and of important social problems. And this is precisely the it is here that they exercise their supreme capacities.17 It direction that the British government has taken character is citizenship education rather than character education education in. The particular understanding of character that best addresses this Aristotelian perspective. education it has advanced, especially when combined with the most recent changes that have been made to References the citizenship curriculum, is consistent with a more general trend over the past few decades towards a Andrews, R. & Mycock, A. (2008). Dilemmas of responsibilization of citizenship (Lister, 2011), with Devolution: The ‘Politics of Britishness’ and Citizenship successive governments arguing for the need for citizens Education. British Politics, 3(2), 139-155. to take increasing personal responsibility for their own Aristotle (1998). [350 BCE] Politics, trans. C.D.C. Reeve. individual educational, health and welfare needs, and for Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company. a significantly greater role to be played by the 17