Functions of civic education: Teachers' priorities

Introduction. A wide range of valuable and active aspects related to citizenship remain not relevant, which leads to the atomisation of society, weakening of the institutional foundations of the state. Today, the development of the civic education system is an important social issue. Therefore, turning to the experience of other countries, including in terms of building their priorities in this area, contributes to the solution of both theoretical and practical problems in national education. It is customary to associate the civic component in the Russian educational system with the implementation of state educational standards aimed at obtaining formal knowledge about society and the state by schoolchildren, as well as with the systematic educational work carried out in educational institutions, focusing on the development of patriotism. As a result, the structure of youth civic orientations is dominated by intentions to consciously distance oneself from politics, the state, a narrowly formalised understanding of citizenship as a set of rights and obligations fixed by law, and patriotism mainly in its protective-military form.
The aim of the present research was to comparatively study the opinions of teachers in 22 countries (including Russia) on the priorities of civic education in schools.
Methodology and research methods. A secondary analysis of the data of the International Civic and Citizenship Education Study, implemented under the auspices of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievements (IEA), serves as a research method. The empirical base of the study is a questionnaire survey of teachers from 22 countries (including Russia). The total sample size was 36674 respondents - 8849 teachers (24% of the sample size), implementing programmes of social sciences, 27825 teachers (76% of the sample size) not directly involved in civic education.
Results and scientific novelty. As a result of the comparative study undertaken, the specificity of the opinion of teachers in Russia and other countries regarding the importance of certain areas of civic education in schools was revealed. The answers to a special question were analysed, suggesting the choice of the most priority options from the proposed ones. At the first stage, a ranking procedure was implemented, which allowed to identify the structure of priorities in each country. In most of them, the formation among students of independent, critical thinking occupies the first position in the ranking. This goal is especially significant in the Scandinavian countries, as well as in Finland. In Russia, the level of support for this priority is one of the lowest (36%) - less than only in South Korea (24%). At the second stage, the target settings of teachers involved in civic education are classified. Using cluster analysis, the types of orientations are determined, that is, a combination of various combinations of answers, and their prevalence among civilian educators. Seven types of orientations have been identified and described: critical, socialisation, social studies, participatory, environmental, conflictological, particularistic. The features of their representation in different countries are described.
Practical significance. The results and conclusions presented in the article, the proposed typology can be used in the process of further development of the issues of civic education, training and education of citizenship, including in other empirical studies. The quantitative data provided can be used as an information base for the development of civic education programmes at various levels, as well as the design of curricula and content of disciplines of civic studies.

1. Galston W. A. Political knowledge, political engagement, and civic education. Annual Review of Political Science. 2001; 1: 217-234.

2. Benin V. L. Democracy and teacher. In: Uchitel' na vse vremena: Materialy XXXII Vserossijskoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii = Teacher for all time. Materials of the XXXII AllRussian Scientific and Practical Conference. Ed. by A. G. Kozlova, V. G. Maralov, R. Sh. Malikov. St. Petersburg: Publishing House NOU “Express”; 2011. p. 74-76. (In Russ.)

3. Sogomonov A. Y. Grazhdanskoe obrazovanie v kontekstah mirovoj istorii = Civic education in the contexts of world history. Moscow: Publishing House Shkola grazhdanskogo prosveshhenija; 2018. 144 p. (In Russ.)

4. Kurennoy V. Philosophy of liberal education: The principles. Voprosy obrazovanija = Educational Studies Moscow. 2020; 1: 8-39. (In Russ.)

5. Almond G. A., S. Verba S. Grazhdanskaja kul'tura: politicheskie ustanovki i demokratija v pjati stranah = The civic culture: Political attitudes and democracy in five nations. Translated from English by E. Hendel. Moscow: Publishing House Mysl'; 2014. 500 p. (In Russ.)

6. Sukhomlinsky V. A. Mudraja vlast' kollektiva (Metodika vospitanija kollektiva) = Wise power of the personnel (Methods of educating the personnel). In: Sukhomlinsky V. A. (ed.). Selected pedagogical essays. Vol. 3. Moscow: Publishing House Pedagogika; 1981. 640 p. (In Russ.)

7. Hantington S. Tret'ya volna. Demokratizaciya v konce XX veka = The third wave: Democratization in the late twentieth century. Moscow: Publishing House Rossijskaja politich-eskaja jenciklopedija (ROSSPJeN); 2003. 368 p. (In Russ.)

8. Macintyre А. Posle dobrodeteli: issledovanija teorii morali = After virtue: A study of moral theory. Moscow: Publishing House Akademicheskij proekt; Ekaterinburg: Publishing House Delovaja kniga; 2000. 384 p. (In Russ.)

9. Kymlicka W. Sovremennaja politicheskaja filosofija: vvedenie = Contemporary political philosophy: An introduction. Translated from English by S. Moiseev. Mоscow: Publishing House of the State University - Higher School of Economics; 2010. 592 p. (In Russ.)

10. Galston W. Liberal purposes: Goods, virtues and duties in the liberal state. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1991. 343 p.

11. Costa M. V. Galston on liberal virtues and the aims of civic education. Theory and Research in Education. 2006; 3: 275-289.

12. Ben-Porath S. Deferring virtue: The new management of students and the civic role of schools. Theory and Research in Education. 2013; 2: 111-128.

13. Garratt D. Democratic citizenship in the curriculum: Some problems and possibilities. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 2000; 3: 323-346.

14. Kisby B., Sloam J. Revitalising politics: The role of citizenship education. Representation. 2009; 3: 313-324.

15. Pasek J., Feldman L., Romer D., Jamieson K. H. Schools as incubators of democratic participation: Building long-term political efficacy with civic education. Applied Developmental Science, 2008; 1: 26-37.

16. Torney-Purta J. The school's role in developing civic engagement: A study of adolescents in twenty-eight countries. Applied Developmental Science. 2002; 4: 203-212.

17. Johnson L., Morris P. Towards a framework for critical citizenship education. The Curriculum Journal. 2010; 1: 77-96.

18. Veugelers W. Creating critical-democratic citizenship education: Empowering humanity and democracy in Dutch education. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education. 2007; 1: 105-119.

19. Westheimer J., Kahne J. Educating the “good” citizen: Political choices and pedagogical goals. PS: Political Science & Politics. 2004; 37 (2): 241-247.

20. Gavriliuk V. V., Malenkov V. V. Civic-mindedness, patriotism, and the upbringing of young people. Russian Education and Society. 2008; 2: 31-44.

21. Lubsky A. V., Volkov Y. G., Denisova G. S., Voytenko V. P., Vodenko K. V. Civic education and citizenship in modern Russian society. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2016; 9 (36): 1-8.

22. Tolstenko A., Baltovskij L., Radikov I. Chance of civic education in Russia. SAGE Open. 2019; 9: 1-16.

23. Dolinina I. G. Civic culture at pedagogical activity in contemporary Russia. Life Science Journal. 2014; 5: 527-531.

24. Zagvyazinsky V. I. Valuable and orientation foundations of educational system of the country. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2016; 6: 11-22. DOI: 10.17853/1994-5639-2016-6-11-22 (In Russ.)

25. Filonov G. I. Citizenship in the structure of self-identity. Vospitanie shkol'nikov = Parenting School-Age Children. 2004; 6: 2-5. (In Russ.)

26. Denisova G. S., Panfilova Y. S. Institutionalization of civic education and construction of civic identity in the high school. Gumanitarij juga Rossii = Humanities of the South of Russia. 2016; 6: 64-73. (In Russ.)

27. Lyubimov L. L. Russian school: Civic consciousness training. Voprosy obrazovanija = Educational Studies Moscow. 2013; 1: 278-300. (In Russ.)

28. Verbitsky A. A., Zhoykin S. A., Kurishkina L. A. Conceptual model of the school as a center for social and contextual education. Pedagogika = Pedagogy. 2020, 3: 15-27. (In Russ.)

29. Bogolyubov L. N. Obshhestvoznanie v sovremennoj shkole: aktual'nye voprosy metodiki = Social studies in the modern school: Actual issues of the methodology. Moscow, St. Petersburg: Publishing House Nestor-Istorija; 2013. 254 p. (In Russ.)

30. Bolotina T. V., Kalutskaya E. K., Mishina I. A., Tyulyaeva T. I. The scientific and theoretical justification for the implementation of the concept of social science education. Prepodavanie istorii v shkole = Teaching History at School. 2017; 5: 3-19. (In Russ.)

31. Schulz W., Carstens R., Losito B., Fraillon J. International civic and citizenship education study 2016: Technical report. Amsterdam: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA); 2018. 314 p.