Understanding young people's citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and dispositions

Abstract

In this article we present insights from research which has sought to deepen understanding of the ways in which young people (13-21) learn democratic citizenship through their participation in a range of different formal and informal practices and communities. Based on the research, we suggest that such understanding should focus on the interplay between contexts for action, relationships within and across contexts, and the dispositions that young people bring to such contexts and relationships. In the first part of the paper we show how and why we have broadened the narrow parameters of the existing citizenship discourse with its focus on political socialisation to encompass a more wide-ranging conception of citizenship learning which is not just focused on school or the curriculum. In the second part of the paper we describe our research and present two exemplar case studies of young people who formed part of the project. In the third part we present our insights about the nature and character of citizenship learning that we have been able to draw from our research. In the concluding section we highlight those dimensions of citizenship learning that would have remained invisible had we focused exclusively on schools and the curriculum. In this way we demonstrate the potential of the approach to understanding citizenship learning that we have adopted.

Full text

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
1
Understanding Young People’s Citizenship Learning in Everyday
Life: The Role of Contexts, Relationships and Dispositions
Gert Biesta,
1
Robert Lawy
2
& Narcie Kelly
2
1
University of Stirling
2
University of Exeter
ABSTRACT
In this article we present insights from research which has sought to deepen
understanding of the ways in which young people (13-21) learn democratic
citizenship through their participation in a range of different formal and informal
practices and communities. Based on the research, we suggest that such understanding
should focus on the interplay between contexts for action, relationships within and
across contexts, and the dispositions that young people bring to such contexts and
relationships. In the first part of the paper we show how and why we have broadened
the narrow parameters of the existing citizenship discourse with its focus on political
socialisation to encompass a more wide-ranging conception of citizenship learning
which is not just focused on school or the curriculum. In the second part of the paper
we describe our research and present two exemplar case studies of young people who
formed part of the project. In the third part we present our insights about the nature
and character of citizenship learning that we have been able to draw from our
research. In the concluding section we highlight those dimensions of citizenship
learning that would have remained invisible had we focused exclusively on schools
and the curriculum. In this way we demonstrate the potential of the approach to
understanding citizenship learning that we have adopted.
KEYWORDS citizenship, young people, learning, democracy
Introduction
The question of young people‟s status as democratic citizens has become the focus of
attention of policy makers, politicians and researchers in many countries around the
world (see, e.g., Giroux, 1989; Englund, 1994; Apple & Beane, 1995; Carr & Hartnett,
1996; Torres 1998; Torney-Purta et al., 2001; Ratisch & Viteritti, 2001; Biesta &
Lawy, 2006; Biesta, 2007). Recent discussions have been fuelled by concerns about
low levels of political participation and engagement and by worries about the erosion
of the moral and social fabric of society (see, e.g., McLaughlin, 2000; Pattie et al.,
2004). Such concerns have not only been expressed by politicians and policy makers,
but also by civil society organisation, parents and teachers, and „the public‟ more
generally. Although there are concerns about society as a whole, young people have
become a principal target of strategies aimed at countering the perceived trend of
political and social alienation. Citizenship education is the cornerstone of these
initiatives. Over the past decades it has been introduced in a large number of
European countries, either as a separate subject or as part of larger curriculum reforms
(see Naval et al., 2002; Eurydice, 2005).
1
1
England was an „early adopter.‟ Here, citizenship education was incorporated into the National
Curriculum in 1988 as one of five cross-curricular themes. In September 2002 it became a statutory
National Curriculum subject for all students at Key Stages 3 and 4 (age 11-16). This was supplemented

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
2
It is interesting to note that the policy response has focused predominantly on young
people and not on the population at large. As Smith et al. have suggested, this could
well be „because it is harder to direct such policies at older people, whereas young
people can be targeted in schools and might be more receptive to citizenship
initiatives‟ (Smith et al., 2005: 426). More than 50 years ago T.H. Marshall referred
to children and young people as „citizens in the making‟ (Marshall, 1950: 25). The
idea that young people are not yet citizens, and the deficit model of citizenship
education which underlies it, has continued to play an important role in educational
policy and practice (see, e.g., Osler & Starkey, 2003; Westheimer & Kahne, 2004;
Lawy & Biesta, 2006). While we do not wish to downplay the significance of
citizenship education – not least because young people themselves have indicated a
lack of knowledge and understanding in this area (see White, Bruce & Ritchie, 2000)
– we do believe that the inclusion of citizenship in the formal curriculum has served
to mask deeper problems concerning young people‟s citizenship and their learning
(see also Gilborn, 2006; Faulks, 2006). Our main concern is with the idea that an
alleged crisis in democratic society can be adequately addressed by (re)educating
young people so as to make them ready for their roles as democratic, participating and
active citizens (see also Biesta, 2006). We see three problems with this line of
thinking.
The first problem with this approach is that it is largely aimed at individual young
people. The assumption is that young people as individuals lack the proper knowledge
and skills, the right values, and the appropriate dispositions – the so-called
„citizenship dimensions‟ (see Kerr, 2005) – to be „good‟ and contributing citizens.
This line of thinking individualises the problem of young people‟s citizenship. In
doing so it is consistent with conservative and neo-liberal ways of thinking in which
individuals themselves are blamed for their social malfunctioning and are made
responsible for working out a solution.
2
It also individualises democratic citizenship
itself through the suggestion that a democratic society will simply follow once all
citizens have acquired the „right‟ set of knowledge, skills, values and dispositions.
While school-based citizenship education may be an important and perhaps even
necessary factor in the realisation of good citizenship, it can never on its own be a
sufficient condition.
The second problem with the idea of citizenship education is that it is based on the
assumption of citizenship as the outcome of an educational and developmental
trajectory. Rather than addressing questions about the constitutive characteristics of
by non-statutory guidelines for citizenship education alongside Personal, Social and Health Education
(PSHE) at Key Stages 1 and 2 (age 5-11) (see QCA, 2000a; 2000b; 2000c). In France „éducation
civique, juridique et sociale‟ (civic, juridical and social education) was introduced in the curriculum of
the „lycées‟ (age 15-19 years of age) in 2001, while „éducation civique‟ (civic education) was
introduced in the curriculum of the „collèges‟ (age 11-14). In the Netherlands the requirement for
schools to provide citizenship education was only introduced in 2006. It was left to the schools to
decide about the actual shape and form of the provision (see Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en
Wetenschappen, 2005).
2
In Biesta & Lawy 2006 we have given a reconstruction of the history of citizenship in Britain after the
Second World War, showing how conceptions of citizenship and citizenship education are closely
related to differing political ideologies.

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
3
good citizenship, the idea of citizenship-as-outcome reveals a strong instrumental or
means-end orientation. As Hall et al. have argued, „contemporary political and policy
discussion is for the most part much less concerned to critically interrogate the
concept of active citizenship, than it is to debate how such a thing might be achieved‟
(Hall et al., 2000: 464). The idea of citizenship-as-outcome is problematic because it
is fabricated on the assumption that citizenship is a status that is only achieved after
one has successfully traversed a specified trajectory. It thus sees citizenship very
much as an „adult experience‟ with young people in the position of being not-yet-
citizens, in a „transitional stage between “childhood” and “adulthood”‟ (France, 1998:
99). This idea of citizenship is exclusive rather than inclusive since it fails to recognise
that young people always already participate in social life and that their lives are
always already implicated in the wider social, economic, cultural and political order
(see Smith et al., 2005; Faulks, 2006).
This raises the question of learning. An obvious problem with any educational
strategy is that there is no guarantee that what is taught will be identical to what is
learned. Proponents of the idea of „effective schooling‟ may want us to believe that it
is only a matter of time before research provides us with teaching strategies that will
guarantee success. Yet apart from the question as to what counts as „success‟ and who
has the right to define it, they seem to forget that learners have to make sense of the
curriculum and the activities they are engaged in, and that they do so on the basis of a
wide and divergent range of experiences (see Lawy, Bloomer & Biesta, 2004; Dewey,
1938). Education is a process of communication,which is predicated upon the active
acts of meaning-making of learners and it is this unpredictable factor which makes
education possible in the first place (Vanderstraeten & Biesta, 2001; 2006). Young
people learn at least as much about democracy and citizenship – including their own
citizenship – through their participation in the range of different practices that make
up their lives, as they learn from that which is officially prescribed and formally
taught. Whilst it is laudable to see schools encouraging internal democratic processes
through such mechanisms as school councils that encourage young people to
participate meaningfully in the collective decision making, this still only represents a
small part of the whole environment in and from which young people learn and
through which they form their civic dispositions and identities.
It is for these reasons that we believe, and have argued elsewhere in more detail
(Biesta & Lawy 2006), that the teaching of citizenship needs to be supplemented with
a more thoroughgoing understanding of the ways in which young people actually
learn democratic citizenship through their participation in the communities and
practices that make up their everyday lives. A focus on young people‟s citizenship
learning in everyday life settings allows for an understanding of the ways in which
citizenship learning is situated in the unfolding lives of young people and helps to
make clear how these lives are themselves implicated in the wider social, cultural,
political and economic order. It is, after all, ultimately this wider context that provides
the opportunities for young people to be democratic citizens and to learn from their
actual „condition of citizenship‟ (Biesta, 2005; see also Faulks, 2006: 137).
In this paper we present insights from a small-scale ethnographic study into the ways
in which young people learn democratic citizenship through their participation – or
for that matter: non-participation (see below) – in the range of practices and

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
4
communities that make up their lives. The main objective of our research has been to
deepen understanding of the ways in which young people‟s participation in the
communities and practices that make up their everyday lives impacts upon their
citizenship learning. We have sought to understand the learning opportunities
afforded by the different settings and communities that make up young people‟s lives,
such as their family, their peers, leisure activities, paid and unpaid work, media and
also, but not primarily or exclusively, formal education and training. We also wanted
to gain an understanding of how such learning evolves over time, primarily in relation
to when young people become part of different communities and engage in different
activities and practices. We were particularly interested in (1) the understandings that
young people have of themselves as citizens; (2) the extent to which they feel able to
contribute and have a say; (3) what this teaches them about the value and relevance of
democratic procedures and practices; and (4) how this, in turn, shapes their attitudes
and dispositions towards democratic procedures and practices, both positively and
negatively. This is what we understand by citizenship learning.
Our approach takes inspiration from John Dewey (see Dewey, 1966; 1954), for whom
democracy is not confined to the sphere of political decision making but extends to
participation in the construction, maintenance and transformation of social and
political life (see Dewey, 1954; see also Bernstein, 2000: xxi). For Dewey democracy
is not merely a form of government but „a mode of associated living, a conjoint
communicated experience‟ (Dewey, 1966: 87). Thus, democracy is not simply about
majority rule but about inclusive ways of social and political action (see Säfström &
Biesta, 2001; Biesta, 2006). It is about experiences of belonging and „having a stake‟
in social life; it is about the opportunities to shape the conditions that in turn shape
opportunities for action (Festenstein, 1997: 70). Dewey refers to the qualities that are
at stake in such processes as social intelligence. He argues that social intelligence is
both a requirement and outcome of participation in intelligent co-operation. As Carr
and Hartnett (1996: 59) explain: „By participating in this process, individuals develop
those intellectual dispositions which allow them to reconstruct themselves and their
social institutions in ways which are conducive to the realization of their freedom and
the reshaping of their society.‟ For Dewey such learning processes are the essence of
democracy because in a democracy „all those who are affected by social institutions
(...) have a share in producing and managing them.‟ (Dewey, 1987: 218) Dewey‟s
understanding of democracy highlights the importance of everyday processes,
practices and experiences in citizenship learning. It highlights, in other words, the
importance of the experience of being a citizen for young people‟s citizenship
learning. Thus Dewey has allowed us to recognise the importance of the actual
condition of young people‟s citizenship for their citizenship learning.
Our focus in this paper is on a particular aspect of the dynamics of young people‟s
citizenship learning, viz., on the role of contexts, relationships and dispositions in
such learning processes. As we demonstrate in more detail below, young people‟s
citizenship learning is not just a cognitive function; it rather is a process that is
situated, that is relational and that is uniquely linked to young people‟s individual
life-trajectories. Understanding the role of contexts, relationships and dispositions in
young people‟s citizenship learning not only contributes to a better understanding of
such learning processes both outside and inside the context of formal educational
settings; it also suggests a different set of implications for policy and practice. In the

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
5
next section we provide background information about our research which was
conducted in the South West of England over a period of four years (Phase 1: 2003-
2005; Phase 2: 2005-2007). We then present two exemplar case studies of Matt and
Kelly, two of the young people who took part in the project. The stories of Matt and
Kelly provide a rich set of insights into the communities and practices that make up
their lives, into their positive and negative experiences of taking part and having a say
and, more generally, into their condition of citizenship, i.e., the ways in which they
can or cannot be citizens. In this respect their accounts are not dissimilar to the stories
of many other of the young people that we interviewed. We use their stories to
illustrate the approach to understanding citizenship learning in everyday life that
emerged from our analysis of the data. This approach, as we will argue, highlights the
importance of the interplay between contexts, relationships and individual
dispositions. The reason why we focus in detail on two cases out of a much larger
data set is because we wish to highlight both the pervasive and elusive nature of
citizenship learning in everyday life. On the one hand it can be argued that citizenship
learning pervades all aspects of young people‟s lives because, in principle, any aspect
of their lives can be relevant for their growth as democratic citizens. On the other
hand, however, there are very few experiences and events in young people‟s lives that
are „labelled‟ as opportunities for citizenship learning. In this respect citizenship
learning in everyday life is elusive, both for the young people themselves and for
researchers trying to make sense of these processes. By focusing on the stories of
Matt and Kelly we aim to show that attention to contexts, relationships and
dispositions can help us to better understand the dynamics of young people‟s
citizenship learning in everyday life.
Citizenship Learning in Everyday Life: The Experiences of Young People
3
The first phase of our research into young people‟s citizenship learning in everyday
life was conducted between 2003 and 2005 in the South West of England. Twenty-
nine young people, ranging in age from thirteen to age twenty at the outset of the
research took part in the study. Each agreed to be interviewed at least twice, with a
period of approximately six to nine months between the interviews. Twenty-five of
the original cohort were re-interviewed a second time. One participant chose to
withdraw from the study and three others moved home and could not be located.
Although a number of the interviewees (particularly the younger ones in secondary
school) were encouraged to participate by their teachers, they were all volunteers.
Eight of the participants were drawn from city based urban contexts; the rest lived in
rural towns and villages. Twenty-four of the participants were in some form of
education and five were in a training/education/work base setting at the outset of the
research. In the second phase of the project (2005-2007) we re-interviewed 8 young
people of the original group and conducted further individual and group interviews
with 30 young people. In this paper we confine ourselves to the first phase of the
research.
3
The first phase of the project was supported by a grant from the University of Exeter. The second
phase was supported by a grant from the British Academy.

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
6
cohort 1: age at first interview
Male
Female
Totals
13-15
4
7
11
16-17
5
7
12
18+
3
3
6
Totals
12
17
29
We approached young people through a variety of different channels – through
school, college and work and also through targeted groups and organisations. These
varied from groups involved in sports and other leisure related activities (such as
dance clubs, pantomime, model making, choirs, singing groups, bell ringing), to those
involved in political and/or environmental activities (such as Fair Trade, recycling,
Youth Parliament, Woodcraft). Many of these groups were located outside of
educational settings.
The participants were encouraged to talk about their lives and to share their
experiences and opinions with the interviewer. Although there were a number of
issues that needed to be raised – related to their backgrounds, interests and hobbies
and experiences of formal and informal and incidental learning – the interviews were
designed to encourage the young people to express their own interests and concerns.
Probing questions encouraged the young people to explore their understandings.
Direct questions were used when seeking factual information or if necessary to steer
the interviewees away from territory that went beyond the broad remit of the research.
In all cases, participants were asked to compare difference of experience, and what
these differences meant to them, if anything. They were also asked to comment-upon
and explore the various influences and learning experiences in their lives. Interviews
were generally completed within one hour and one and quarter hours. Second
interviews followed a similar pattern to the first interviews where the emphasis was
upon gathering information, with further probing to check out themes and ideas,
anomalies and contradictions that had been identified from first interviews.
Notwithstanding this, the young people were encouraged to address any new issues or
interests that were of concern to them. Crucial here were the changes in understanding
that had taken place.
All interviews were recorded and transcribed. Analysis of data was undertaken at
different levels. Each first interview was analysed as a case study, as well as coded for
key themes. Through this process further questions and themes for second interviews
were identified for follow up and exploration. The analysis of individual case studies
has provided insights into individual experience and transformation, whereas themed
analysis has identified more general issues that have been utilised to support our
emerging understanding. Through the presentation and discussion of two case studies
– the stories of Matt and Kelly – we present findings from our theme analysis which
highlights a particular aspect of the dynamics of young people‟s citizenship learning,
viz., the role of contexts, relationships and dispositions in such learning processes
Matt
4
4
All names used in this paper are pseudonyms.

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
7
Matt was interviewed initially when he was aged 15 in Year 11 in his secondary
school and was re-interviewed after having moved to the local further education
college where he was studying for 2 A-levels in Biology and Psychology.
5
Matt and
his family reside in a small town in the South-West of England. As he said:
My family is basically my life so ... if I make a choice of doing
something I would think about the consequences, like in my family
and things like that. (1
st
interview)
When asked to describe other things that were important to him Matt underlined the
importance of his hobbies and interests, which were integral to his family
relationships and identity:
I‟m into extreme sports, surfing, mountain boarding ... it‟s like
skateboard with tyres ... I‟m actually in a team for the mountain
boarding. I‟ve been doing it for about a year now. (1
st
interview)
Matt explained that he also enjoyed playing squash with his brother:
I see it as sort of like bonding time. ... It‟s completely different to
having a conversation. It‟s, I can‟t explain it, it‟s playing a game
but you‟re just there on your own and it‟s really nice. (1
st
interview)
He also valued the time spent with his father, skateboarding, mountain boarding and
surfing or just „chuck[ing] a rugby ball around‟. As he said:
It‟s nice it feels like they‟re there for you ‟cos if you‟ve got
someone that you can rely on ... If I‟ve got something on my mind
I can tell my mum or my brother. If I want different kinds of
advice I can ask my mum or dad or my brother. It depends what it
is. ... I have, like more of … a laugh sort of relationship with my
dad. We enjoy the same comedy and humour and enjoy the same
jokes and I never really argue with dad. … I can be serious with
my mum and … like talk to her about what I think or something,
but with my dad it would probably turn into a joke! (1
st
interview)
These familial relationships were typically mediated through activities such as sport
with his brother and father. In all cases it was the relationships and the respect and
trust that they implied that were important to him:
My brother … had a girlfriend for about 10 months and he finished
with her and he always tells me what he‟s feeling and sometimes –
there‟s a park near us – we go and kick a ball around and we sit
5
In the English education system Year 11 is the final year of compulsory schooling (which goes up to
the age of 16). Students normally take GCSE exams (General Certificate of Secondary Education) at
the end of Year 11. After their compulsory schooling students can do „A-levels‟ (Advanced Level
General Certificate of Education). This takes another two years and this phase of secondary schooling
is commonly referred to as the „sixth form.‟ A sixth form can be part of a Further Education college.

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
8
down and he‟ll like tell me how he‟s feeling or something and he‟ll
say „I feel much better now,‟ and that‟s really good with my
brother. (1
st
interview)
His relationship with his mother was different:
We‟ll just like get into a good conversion about something like
maybe something that comes up on TV and she‟ll tell me about her
experiences and things and we‟ll just have a discussion about that.
... She listens quite a lot and she likes to hear my opinion and what
I think. (1
st
interview)
Matt did not perceive school as a place that necessarily encouraged the same types of
discourse and relationships. In fact, he felt to a degree cheated at school.
They [teachers] say they‟re not allowed to say their own opinion
because it would sway our opinion. We may think that‟s the way
we should think because it‟s a teacher and they‟re teaching us, but
when teachers do tell you their opinion it makes it a lot easier to
understand them and the way they think. (1
st
interview)
By the time of his second interview Matt had entered the 6
th
form (aged 16-17). He
was conscious of some significant changes in the attitudes of his teachers.
They [teachers] treat you more like an adult and they‟re more like
a mate instead of telling you what to do, and they just give you a
lot more responsibility which makes you feel a lot older. (2
nd
Interview)
Nonetheless Matt was not always able to see the point of what he believed were some
petty and often bureaucratic rules in school. Yet, outside school, he could see the
purpose of the rules, concerning such issues as health and safety, which were
associated with his sport-related interests. As he said:
Yeah, the thing with things like a rule in school … it‟s just like a
rule that you don‟t really want to follow... It affects you more like
in surfing or something and then you actually benefit from it. (2
nd
Interview)
Outside of school Matt had developed a penchant for the extreme sport of mountain
boarding and had recently competed in the National Championships. Matt explained
that he was involved in all aspects of the Mountain Boarding club including the
development of the course itself: „[T]hat‟s kind of my creation in a way‟ and it feels
good „to think that adults are hearing my opinion‟.
The bloke, the man who runs the Mountain Board Centre, Stuart,
he‟s from New Zealand. ... (W)e all got together and suddenly
started going every week and did some training and just basically
built better courses … there‟s about twelve of us. We‟ve got a lady

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
9
in the team and two young boys who are about eight. And we meet
every week in the winter now and then we‟ll meet and it‟s
basically social as well. ...It‟s a nice thing to meet up and we all get
on really well. (1
st
interview)
The Mountain Board Centre was an important and integral part of Matt‟s world,
through which he was able to locate and connect different dimensions of his life
within an interlocking framework. There was his mother‟s support on the village
(parish) council in the discussions about the centre‟s activities. There was also his
involvement as an instructor in the centre which arose directly from his commitment
to the sport. Matt received a small payment for teaching but this did not constitute his
main motivation. As he said in his second interview, „sometimes they [new people]
come along and they think, “oh I‟ll never go” and then it‟s good because you can
make them enjoy it and it‟s a great satisfaction ...‟.
The point for Matt was that he was able to express his opinions in this forum in a way
that would have been unheard of in school where „you just can‟t say what you think‟.
What he valued in particular were the more equal and democratic relationships that he
was already predisposed to through his family.
[I]t‟s teaching the way of life again and it‟s nice to see that
someone has [respect for you]. It shows a way of them caring
about you and thinking they‟re listening to you so they must care
and want to know instead of just going off the subject and thinking
„they know nothing‟. (1
st
interview)
Matt found it difficult to engage fully with issues that he could not easily identify with
and which fell outside of the ambit of his experience. Reflecting upon this he said:
[L]ike on red nose day when they show all that stuff it does like
sort of hit you for a minute. But I don‟t know ... If I was involved
in it definitely – it makes me sound insensitive but – yeah literally
in front of me then as you say like, I‟m involved in it. ... If I was
there, those kids that aren‟t eating and things, that would affect me
but I‟m just seeing it on the telly. It‟s not, you‟re not a hundred
percent. I feel you don‟t know if it‟s a hundred percent real. Yeah,
an image rather than something [certain and real]. (2
nd
Interview)
We have indicated that Matt‟s „democratic‟ family relationships comprised an
important and crucial factor in his learning. Furthermore, the understandings that he
garnered were consolidated by his democratic experiences in learning in other
(sporting and leisure-related) dimensions of his life. Indeed, he transported what he
learned from these relationships to his relationships outside of the family. As he said:
It always plays on my mind. I think about the consequences, like
things that would happen maybe within my friends and people that
I don‟t know well. It just plays on my mind and I think about it.
(1
st
Interview)

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
10
More generally Matt came through as a young person who was very aware of his own
learning and of the opportunities for learning that still lay ahead.
I‟m still young and still learning life. ... I‟m still really a kid, I‟m
only a fraction into my life ... good, still knowing that I‟ve got that
ahead of me. (1
st
interview)
Kelly
Kelly did not have the same kind of open relationship with her parents or extended
family as did Matt. Her father had died when she was very young and her mother had
re-married. This had not worked out and after a short period she had divorced. Kelly‟s
mother was now married for the third time. Many of her discussions with her mother
and current stepfather tended to revolve around day-to-day issues.
We don‟t really talk much at home. My step-dad is like on the
computer. My Mum is cleaning up the house and I‟m just watching
telly. (2
nd
interview)
Although Kelly claimed to have a good relationship with her stepfather, she blamed
him for taking his mother away from her and her brother Tom (aged 19).
Yeah, I liked it when it was just me and my Mum and brother
because I had Mum all to myself. (1
st
interview )
Although Kelly did not have a close personal relationship with Tom she was clearly
concerned for his welfare, particularly since he had served in Iraq with the army: „[I]
was upset because I thought he was going to die.‟ Despite her worries for her brother,
she was unable and perhaps even unwilling to connect her brother‟s situation in Iraq
with broader political and moral connotations: „Locally things that happen here [are
important] … Yeah [I‟m] stuck in my own little world.‟
Outside of the family Kelly was an active member of the majorettes (a marching
group), and was involved in her local youth club. It was these leisure-related activities
and interests that provided a space where she could stand for herself and work co-
operatively with others. When asked about her role in the youth club and her reasons
for joining she said:
Well it‟s like ... I was talking to my friends and she [the youth-
worker] was like „Oh we need some people to start a youth club ...
up again and do stuff‟. So, like she asked us ... to do it and we said
„Yeah‟. So it‟s like every Wednesday night and … she gave us
loads of cameras when the fair was down, to take pictures and
everything of like people on rides ... And we done like a collage.
(1
st
interview)
Kelly chose to leave school at her earliest opportunity (aged 16) when offered the
opportunity to work full-time (having previously worked there on a part-time basis)

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
11
alongside her mother, as a trainee, in a hairdressing salon. Kelly explained that she
had not enjoyed her time at school.
I just think some things are really pathetic here [school]. …
Jewellery, apparently you can catch your nose stud on a door or
something, walk into a door and catch it on something and like …
stuff like that. (1
st
interview)
She provided some indication of the sort of frustrations that she felt and of her anger
and resentment at not feeling able to express herself in her school environment where
linguistic competence was highly valued. Her response was to resort to bravado:
Everyone‟s scared of me [in school]. ... I‟m hard. … [T]his kid
comes up to me and goes: „Oh you‟re going to beat up my mate‟,
and I went: „Am I?‟ And she goes: „Yeah, she‟s crying‟, and I went
over to her and went: „Mate I ain‟t gonna beat you up…‟, like that.
(1
st
interview)
Yeah, everyone‟s scared of me [in school]. I don‟t know why. …. I
know because I have like younger friends and they come up to me
and say, „Oh she‟s scared of you because of some reason‟, and I‟m
like „Oh‟. (2
nd
interview)
Kelly‟s world was very much centred upon those events and characteristics that
marked her day-to-day life. She did not reflect or theorise-upon her actions. For the
most part her experiences comprised an agglomeration of actions and practices that
were largely uncoordinated and did not seem to carry any strong sense of perspective
or change. Her career was not planned in any way but was simply a continuing
outcome that was sometimes serendipitous in its effects. Kelly‟s work, for example, in
the hairdressing salon was not something that had been consciously planned, rather it
represented an opportunity for her to work and earn money in an environment that
was familiar. The fact that her contribution was valued was an unintended outcome or
side-effect, albeit an important one. As she said:
[The staff treat me] as friends really. It‟s like you‟re out with your
mates. It‟s like that. (1
st
interview)
Working in the hairdressing salon she could simply get on with the job in hand,
concentrate upon her world, and was not faced with having to make decisions about
things that she was not confident about. Initially, as a part-timer she would simply do
as she was asked:
Like if my boss just says „Oh the windows need cleaning because
we‟ve got these little glass bits on the window‟, I always just do
them. I just clean really. (1
st
interview)
By the time of her 2
nd
interview she was doing much more and was beginning to
realise that the work necessitated managing some awkward customers.

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
12
They‟re too fussy and I‟m only washing their hair, and they put
their head forward so you can wash that bit there. And then you get
them soaking and then they complain, and it‟s like „well don‟t put
your head forward then‟. But I can‟t say that. (2
nd
interview)
Her discovery that she was both influencing and being influenced by the world around
her represented a crucial turning point for Kelly. For the first time, she was able to
acknowledge both the impact of her relationships with others, and their effects upon
her learning opportunities. This represented an expansion of her learning horizon,
offering the opportunity for further but yet unfulfilled, democratically constituted
learning.
Contexts, Relationships and Dispositions
The stories of Matt and Kelly provide a rich set of insights into the communities and
practices that make up their everyday lives, into their experiences of taking part and
having a say, and into their condition of citizenship more generally. They show that
their everyday citizenship is not one-dimensional but consists of a wide range of
different experiences which not only provide different opportunities for acting and
being but, in relation to this, also provide a range of opportunities for citizenship
learning. They also show that opportunities for citizenship learning pervade all
aspects of life yet, at the same time they indicate that it is difficult to pin down the
moment of citizenship learning. In this respect the stories show that citizenship
learning is both pervasive and elusive. In these respects the stories of Matt and Kelly
are not dissimilar to the accounts of many other young people we interviewed. For the
purpose of this chapter we wish to focus on one particular aspect of young people‟s
citizenship learning which highlights the importance of (the interplay between)
contexts, relationships and dispositions.
The first thing we found through our analysis is a confirmation of the fact that
contexts do matter. Different contexts provide different opportunities for acting and
being, and thus different opportunities for citizenship learning. In Matt‟s case, for
example, there were clear differences between his experiences in the family and
leisure context on the one hand, and school on the other. He was fortunate in that his
family experiences were to a large degree organised on inclusive (democratic)
principles. His views were valued and he was afforded a space in which to be active
and to contribute. Kelly‟s experiences of early learning within the family were
altogether different. While her family relationships were important to her, they did not
afford her the same opportunities for being and learning. This became more evident in
her 2
nd
interview as she described her role in those activities that she undertook
outside of the family and school, but this was still largely perfunctory. It is not that
Kelly‟s experiences were in any way less authentic than those of Matt, rather that the
different contexts or settings that she was exposed to did not frame her early
dispositions in the same way as those of Matt; they provided opportunities for acting
and for her to exercise her agency at a different point in her life. This does not mean,
of course, that Kelly did not learn from her family experiences or from her schooling,
rather that her learning experiences were largely structured and organised in a non-
democratic way. Matt also had to contend with non-democratic experiences. What he
was able to do at an earlier time in his life than Kelly, was to take these non-

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
13
democratic experiences, such as rule-following in school, and locate them alongside
his more democratic experiences.
While we recognise that the opportunities for being, acting and learning afforded by
different contexts are partly the result of the ways in which young people experience
and give meaning to them, we found it useful to develop a basic typology of contexts
for citizenship learning. We characterised the range of contexts as falling into one of
four broad groupings: unavoidable, compulsory, voluntary and ambiguous contexts.
The first of these includes those situations that are quite simply unavoidable. The
family is case-in-point insofar as all individuals need to be nurtured in some way
either through the family or a surrogate in their early years in order to survive. The
second group comprises compulsory contexts, such as schooling, where there is a
formal or legal requirement of attendance. The third group comprises voluntary
contexts (often leisure-related or peer related) where young people have a degree of
choice in respect of their commitment and participation. We labelled the final
grouping ambiguous. This includes all the situations where there are elements of more
than one of the groupings that we have described. For example, we found that work
was ambiguous for many of the young people in our research. For those in school and
college, the work they were involved in (part-time jobs) was not compulsory, whereas
for others – and this applied to some of the young people who worked to supplement
their family finances whilst in school or college – it was a matter of necessity if not
compulsion to work. For some young people, what began as a way to earn some extra
pocket-money (for example Kelly), became almost compulsory when their preferred
life-style became increasingly dependent on their extra income. Another ambiguous
context related to the impact of the media which seemed to vary from person to
person (it was labelled ambiguous for this reason) and was dependent in large
measure to both the external conditions, and the dispositions of the young people.
Other settings which could also be labelled as ambiguous included college/university
education. Although officially non-compulsory, for many young people it had a
compulsory „feel‟ given the social pressures and the desire of young people to gain
higher qualifications in order to increase their job prospects. Affiliations to religious
groups were another example of ambiguous contexts, contexts that could be or
become more compulsory or even unavoidable in the lives of young people.
Although this typology only gives an indication of significant differences between
contexts, it is a helpful lens to understand the dynamics of citizenship learning in that
it helps to understand the different ways in which opportunities for acting, being and
learning are related to contextual characteristics. In compulsory contexts such as the
school there are limited opportunities for having a say and influencing the conditions
of schooling, which partly explains why the experiences with school as an institution
are largely negative for both Matt and Kelly. Unavoidable contexts lack the extent of
choice available in voluntary contexts, but this does not mean that there are no
opportunities for acting and shaping the situation. It is clear, however, that in the
context of the family these opportunities turned out to be significantly different for
Matt and Kelly. Voluntary contexts allow for a different kind of engagement.
Although such context may vary in the extent to which young people can have a say
and influence the situation, the very fact that they engage in such contexts on a
voluntary basis makes their engagement of a different quality than in the case of
unavoidable and compulsory contexts. Ambiguous contexts carry elements of the

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
14
other three contexts. Much depends here on the particular balance between
unavoidable, compulsory and voluntary elements.
Although contexts are important for citizenship learning in everyday life, our second
main finding is that the impact of different contexts is crucially mediated by the
relationships within contexts; furthermore, that broader relational aspects concerning
the organisation and structuring of young people‟s experiences across contextual
boundaries, are significant. This claim presumes that the understandings of young
people are a function of context, and yet at the same time conditional upon their prior
experiences and understandings. Matt‟s experiences of school, for example, were not
entirely positive, nonetheless he was able to distinguish between the institutional and
the personal and individual relationships with teachers and pupils that he regarded in a
more positive light. He certainly did not see school as encouraging democratic
relationships and participation where he was required to follow rules without any
explanation. But as he notes in his first interview, he was also conscious that his
teachers were not immune from this external control. Matt‟s experiences of school
were counterbalanced by his experiences elsewhere in the relationships that he
fabricated in his sporting activities at the Mountain Boarding Club and in his family.
These relationships were founded upon trust and a set of shared values and
commitments. Kelly‟s experiences of school as a fundamentally non-democratic
institution mirrored the experiences of Matt. Her world was very much centred upon
those events and characteristics that marked her day-to-day life. She did not reflect
upon or theorise-upon her actions. For the most part her experiences comprised an
agglomeration of actions and practices that were largely uncoordinated and did not
seem to carry any strong sense of perspective or change. Kelly‟s career, for example,
was not planned in any way but simply represented an opportunity for her to continue
to earn money, alongside her mother. The fact that her contribution in the hairdressing
salon was valued was an unintended outcome or side-effect, albeit an important one.
Our third finding is that opportunities to young people for citizenship learning are not
only dependent on contexts and relationships but are also conditional upon their
individual dispositions – the different ways in which they approach situations and
relationships. The critical question is not so much that young people act in these
different ways rather it is to identify those factors and influences, together with their
relational characteristics, that impinge upon their dispositions. By the time that Matt
entered the 6
th
form (Year 12) of his school it was clear that he had become a
reflective learner who was able to think through the consequences of his actions and
the actions of others. Kelly‟s disposition and attitude was more hedonistic and very
much grounded in the here and now. While her life was as least as eventful as Matt‟s,
she had yet to reflect or theorise upon her actions, and this clearly had an impact on
the quality of her learning. These differences, and the opportunities for being and
acting that are contingent upon them, are not merely the outcome of personal
characteristics but also depend on earlier learning experiences and the relations
between them. This indicates that young people‟s citizenship learning is intimately
connected to young people‟s individual life-trajectories – an issue we have explored
in more detail elsewhere (see Lawy & Biesta, 2007).
To understand young people‟s citizenship learning in everyday life in terms of the
interplay between contexts, relationships and dispositions is, of course, not all there is

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
15
to say about these learning processes. We do wish to contend, however, that using this
„lens‟ is a helpful way to capture both the pervasive and elusive nature of such
learning processes and, in this way, cannot only help us to better understand the
complexities of citizenship learning in everyday life, but also provides avenues for the
support and improvement of these learning processes. For policy makers one of the
most important messages from the approach outlined in this paper is that any attempt
to improve young people‟s citizenship should start with the improvement of the
democratic quality of the communities and practices that make up people‟s lives. It is,
after all, the quality of the actual condition of young people‟s citizenship – i.e., the
opportunities for participation and engagement – that is of crucial importance for
democratic action, being and learning. For citizenship education one of the most
important implications of our approach has to do with the interaction between
citizenship learning inside and outside of the formal citizenship curriculum. It is likely
that citizenship education will benefit most in those situations where there is a
synergy between the official curriculum and the everyday „lessons‟ in citizenship.
This, again, points at the importance of the democratic quality of contexts and
relationships within and across those contexts.
Conclusion
Reporting on the third year of an eight year longitudinal study into citizenship
education in England, Kerr notes the complexity of the processes of citizenship
learning.
[Y]oung peoples‟ development of citizenship dimensions (knowledge,
skills, understanding, attitudes and behaviours) is complex and
influenced by a range of interrelated factors and influences. These
influences include contextual characteristics … or factors, „sites‟ of
citizenship education (school, family, peer groups, community) and
the various actors (teachers, parents, friends) that take part in the
(formal and informal) educational processes at these different „sites‟.
(Kerr, 2005: 88)
The analysis of our data supports this view. But unlike what seems to be implied in
Kerr‟s statement, we do not start from an assumption that young people are in any
way deficient in terms of their citizenship status. Rather we assume that the lives of
young people are not outside of but are part of the social fabric, and that their
citizenship learning is a direct result of their articulation with the conditions of
citizenship that we have described. This reveals the importance of „having a say,‟
„being taken seriously,‟ and „having an influence‟ whilst also indicating the
transformatory potential of these influences upon behaviour and action. All of these
factors provide young people with opportunities and experiences that are crucial to the
process of citizenship learning. But they differ strongly from context to context, are
crucially mediated by relationships, and influenced by the dispositions that young
people bring to such situations.
Despite the fact that progress is being made, through the newly introduced curriculum
for citizenship education, to make schooling a more democratic experience, our
research suggests that many young people continue to regard school as a non-
democratic institution suffused with rules and regulations. There is some evidence to

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
16
suggest that this has served to only emphasise the lack of control and „felt‟ agency of
young people over significant portions of their lives. One of the most significant
findings of our research is the special quality of leisure activities, such as sport, in
which young people are able to relate with adults in a way that is structurally different
from their relationships with parents and caregivers and teachers. It may well be that
these contexts are amongst the most significant ones with respect to the process of
citizenship learning – a point that warrants further analysis and discussion (see also
Biesta et al., 2001). By way of contrast the profound lack of involvement and
engagement of young people in „official politics‟ where they typically feel
marginalised and excluded and where their views and opinions have little or no effect
upon national, let alone international issues and policies, came as little surprise to us
(see also Faulks, 2006: 136-137). Although Matt and Kelly were aware of the impact
of international issues and questions, such as those concerning Iraq, their interests
were largely focused upon local and personal questions that had direct bearing upon
their day-to-day lives and over which they were able to exert some control.
To date our findings have highlighted dimensions of democratic learning that would
have remained invisible had the focus been exclusively on schools and the
curriculum. We have shown – through the „triad‟ of contexts, relationships and
dispositions – that young people learn from the opportunities for action, participation
and reflection that are afforded by the practices and communities in their everyday
lives. Furthermore, young people learn by way of the experiences they bring into any
situation (their prior learning), and from the different relationships and contexts that
they find themselves in. We recognise that the approach of this paper is only a first
step in exploring the complexities of citizenship learning and that much more is
possible. If there is one practical conclusion that we might want to draw from our
research so far, it is that a more appropriate and effective response to all the concerns
about young people‟s citizenship and the future of democracy and citizenship learning
should lie in a concern for the actual condition of young people‟s citizenship, rather
than in the mere improvement of the curriculum for citizenship teaching.
References
Apple, M.W. & Beane, J.A. (1995) Democratic Schools. Alexandria, VA: Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Bernstein, B. (2000) Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity. [Revised edition.]
Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Biesta, G.J.J. (2005) The learning democracy? Adult learning and the condition of
democratic citizenship. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 26(5), 693-709.
Biesta, G.J.J. (2006) Beyond Learning. Democratic Education for a Human Future
Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.
Biesta, G.J.J. & Lawy, R. (2006) From teaching citizenship to learning democracy.
Overcoming individualism in research, policy and practice, Cambridge Journal of
Education, 36(1), 63-79.

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
17
Biesta, G.J.J., Stams, G.J.J.M., Dirks, E., Rutten, E.A., Veugelers, W & Schuengel, C.
(2001) Does sport make a difference? An exploration of the impact of sport on the
social integration of young people. In J. Steenbergen, P. de Knop & A.H.F. Elling (eds)
Values and Norms in Sport, pp. 95-113. Oxford: Meyer & Meyer Sport.
Biesta, G.J.J. (2007) Education and the democratic person: Towards a political
understanding of democratic education. Teachers College Record, 109(3), 740-769.
Carr, W. & Hartnett, A. (1996) Education and the Struggle for Democracy: The Politics
of Educational Ideas. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Dewey, J. (1938) Experience and Education. New York: Macmillan.
Dewey, J. (1954[1927]) The Public and its Problems. Chicago: The Swallow Press.
Dewey, J. (1966 [1916]). Democracy and Education. New York: Macmillan.
Dewey, J. (1987[1937]) Democracy and educational administration. In J.A. Boydston
(ed.) John Dewey. The Later Works, 1925-1953. Volume 11: 1935-1937, pp.217-252.
Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.
Englund, T. (1994) Communities, markets and traditional values: Swedish schooling in
the 1990s. Curriculum Studies, 2(1), 5-29.
Eurydice (2005) Citizenship education at school in Europe. Survey. BrusselS:
European Commission.
Faulks, K. (2006) Rethinking citizenship education in England: Some lessons from
contemporary social and political theory. Education, citizenship and social justice,
1(2), 123-140.
Festenstein, M. (1997) Pragmatism and Political Theory. From Dewey to Rorty.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
France, A. (1998) „Why should we care?‟ Young people, citizenship and questions of
social responsibility, Journal of Youth Studies, 1(1), 97-111.
Gilborn, D. (2006) Citizenship education as placebo. „Standards,‟ institutional racism
and education. Education, citizenship and social justice, 1(1), 83-104.
Giroux, H.A. (1989) Schooling for Democracy. Critical Pedagogy in the Modern Age.
London/New York: Routledge.
Hall, T., Williamson, H. & Coffey, A. (2000) Young people, citizenship and the Third
Way: a role for the youth service?, Journal of Youth Studies, 3(4), 461-472.
Kerr, D. (2005) Citizenship education in England – listening to young people: new
insights from the citizenship education longitudinal study, International Journal of
Citizenship and Teacher Education, 1(1), pp. 74-96.

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
18
Lawy, R. & Biesta, G.J.J. (2006) Citizenship-as-practice: the educational implications
of an inclusive and relational understanding of citizenship. British Journal of
Educational Studies, 54(1), 34-50.
Lawy, R. & Biesta, G.J.J. (2007) Citizenship learning and democracy in the lives of
young people. Paper presented at the Adult Education Research Conference (AERC).
Mount Saint Vincent University, Halifax Nova Scotia, June 7-9.
Lawy, R. Bloomer, M. & Biesta, G.J.J. (2004) „School‟s just a catalyst.‟ Learning,
identity and knowledge and the Post-16 curriculum, Journal of Vocational Education
and Training, 56(2), 205-226.
Marshall, T.H. (1950) Citizenship and Social Class and other Essays. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
McLaughlin, T.H. (2000) Citizenship education in England: The Crick report and
beyond. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 34(4), 541-570.
Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschappen (2005) Wetsvoorstel 29959
‘Bevordering Actief Burgerschap en Sociale Integratie’. [Lawproposal
29959Promotion of Active Citizenship and Social Integration.] Den Haag: Ministerie
van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschappen.
Naval, C., Print, M. & Veldhuis, R. (2002) Education for democratic citizenship in the
new Europe: context and reform. European Journal of Education, 37(2), 107-128.
Osler, A. & Starkey, H. (2003) Learning for cosmopolitan citizenship: theoretical
debates and young people‟s experiences, Educational Review, 55(3), 243–54.
Pattie, C., Seyd, P. & Whiteley, P. (2004) Citizenship in Britain: Values, Participation
and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
QCA (2000a) Citizenship at Key Stages 3 and 4. Initial Guidance for Schools
(London, Qualifications and Curriculum Authority).
QCA (2000b) Personal, Social and Health Education and Citizenship at Key Stages 1
and 2. Initial Guidance for Schools (London, Qualifications and Curriculum
Authority).
QCA (2000c). Personal, Social and Health Education at Key Stages 3 and 4. Initial
Guidance for Schools (London, Qualifications and Curriculum Authority).
Ratisch, D. & J. Viteritti (Eds.) (2001) Making Good Citizens. New Haven & Londen:
Yale University Press.
Säfström, C.-A. & Biesta, G.J.J. (2001) Learning democracy in a world of difference,
The School Field, 12(5/6), 5-20.

Biesta, G.J.J., Lawy, R.S. & Kelly, N. (2009). Understanding young people’s
citizenship learning in everyday life: The role of contexts, relationships and
dispositions. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 5-24.
19
Smith, N., Lister, R., Middleton, S. & Cox, L. (2005) Young people as real citizens:
towards an inclusionary understanding of citizenship, Journal of Youth Studies, 8(4),
425-443.
Vanderstraeten, R. & Biesta, G.J.J. (2001) How is education possible?, Educational
Philosophy and Theory, 33(1), 7-21.
White, C., Bruce, S. & Ritchie, J. (2000) Young People’s Politics: Political Interest
and Engagement Amongst 14- to 24-year olds. York: YPS.
Torney-Purta, J., Lehman, R., Oswald, H., & Shulz, W. (2001) Citizenship and
Education in Twenty-Eight Countries: Civic Knowledge and Engagement at Age
Fourteen. Amsterdam: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational
Achievement (IEA).
Torres, C.A. (1998) Democracy, Education and Multiculturalism. Dilemmas of
Citizenship in a Global World. Lanham, Md: Rowman and Littlefield.
Vanderstraeten, R. & Biesta, G.J.J. (2001) How is education possible?, Educational
Philosophy and Theory, 33(1), 7-21.
Vanderstraeten, R. & Biesta, G.J.J. (2006) How is education possible? A pragmatist
account of communication and the social organisation of education. British Journal of
Educational Studies, 54(2), 160-174.
Westheimer, J., & Kahne, J. (2004) What kind of citizen? The politics of educating
for democracy. American Educational Research Journal, 41 (2), 237-269.
Correspondence
Gert Biesta, Institute of Education, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, Scotland,
UK
[e-mail@: gert.biesta@stir.ac.uk]