An Investigative Study into Pupils' Perceptions of Europe

This article was downloaded by: [Northeastern University]On: 16 October 2014, At: 11:21Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Multilingual andMulticultural DevelopmentPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rmmm20

An Investigative Studyinto Pupils' Perceptions ofEuropeAnne Convery , Michael Evans , SimonGreen , Ernesto M Acaro & Janet MellorPublished online: 29 Mar 2010.

To cite this article: Anne Convery , Michael Evans , Simon Green , Ernesto MAcaro & Janet Mellor (1997) An Investigative Study into Pupils' Perceptions ofEurope, Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 18:1, 1-16

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01434639708666299

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of allthe information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on ourplatform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensorsmake no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinionsand views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed byTaylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be reliedupon and should be independently verified with primary sources ofinformation. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses,actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directlyor indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the useof the Content.

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rmmm20

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01434639708666299

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private studypurposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of accessand use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

21 1

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

An Investigative Study into Pupils’Perceptions of Europe

Anne ConverySchoo l o f Education , Un ive rsity o f No tting ham , Un ive rsity Park, No ttingham NG 6 2RD

Michael EvansDepa rtm ent of Ed uca tio n , Un ive rsity of C am b rid ge , 17 T rum p ing ton S tree t,Camb ridge CB2 1Q A

Simon GreenTrin ity and A ll Sa in ts Un ive rsity C o llege , B rownberrie Lane , Horsfo rth , Leed s LS18 5HD

Ernesto MacaroDepa rtm ent of A rts and Hum a n it ie s in Educa tion , U n ive rsity of Re ad ing ,Bu lm e rshe C o u rt, Ea rle y, Read ing RG6 1H Y

Janet MellorD iv ision of Ed uca tio n , Un ive rsity of She ffie ld , She ff ie ld S10 2 TN

This article reports on a study into the perceptions of 1300 European teenagers regard-ing the Europe they inhabit. It focuses on their declared knowledge sources, theirattitudes towards a European identity and their aspirations for the future. Based on anexamination of official documentation, questionnaires and interviews in six EU coun-tries (England, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain) there is a criticalanalysis of the current state of the teaching of the European dimension in thosecountries in the light of ministerial decree and national curricula. The article includesdiscussion of the role of schools, the media and the home environment in shaping theperceptions of these young people and concludes with proposals for a radical rethinkof pedagogical agendas. A more detailed analysis of the study, in the context ofEuropean Citizenship, can be found in Convery et al. (1997)

IntroductionThe long-term success of the European Union and indeed of Europe as a

unified whole will depend on present and future younger generations makingan emotional as well as a rational response to the notion of being European. Butdo young people in Europe today feel European? What is the extent of theirknowledge about Europe? What are their views on European issues? What aretheir attitudes to European Citizenship? Very few studies have produced suchanalysis. Yet it is vital that an attempt be made to discover what is the politicaland cultural European perspective among teenagers in order to assess thepotential and effectiveness of educational policy regarding the role of theEuropean dimension in the curriculum.

Following the landmark resolution of the 24 May 1988 by the EuropeanCouncil of Ministers of Education (EC, 1988), governments of member stateswere required to produce their own policy document in response, outlining waysin which the European dimension would become an integral part of the school

1

0143-4632/97/01 0001-16 $10.00/0 © 1997 A. Convery et al.JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL AND MULTICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT Vol. 18, No. 1, 1997

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

11:

21 1

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

curriculum and teacher training courses. It is now pertinent to ask how thatpolicy is being transferred into practice and whether any conclusions can bedrawn which might influence future policy-making.

Research Project MethodologyAt the heart of the research project is a questionnaire administered in six

countries (England, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, and Spain,) in thespring and summer of 1994 which produced a total of 1292 responses. Becauseof ease of access to English schools the number of questionnaires are weightedin favour of English pupils. The figure breaks down by country as follows:England 554, France 181, Germany 129, Italy 140, The Netherlands 117, Spain 171.Respondents were represented almost equally by both sexes and were agedbetween 12–18. However the vast majority fell into the 14–16 age category(90.6%). The sample covered a whole range of types of schools from a variety ofsocial and geographical areas. A total of 23 schools throughout Europe weresurveyed. This ensured that no category of social group was represented by morethan 30% of the overall sample (parental occupation being categorised accordingto: The Market Research Society, Occupational Groupings, A Job Dictionary,(1990)). Ethnic groupings throughout Europe were represented as follows:Afro-Caribbeans 1.5%, Asians 7.4%, Whites 80.3%, Other 9.7%.

The questionnaires were devised in English and then translated into therelevant languages. The questionnaire data was supported by semi-structuredinterviews (carried out in L1 and recorded) in England, France, Germany andItaly in the schools where the questionnaires had been administered. A total of60 interviews were carried out with pupils and some 31 interviews with teachers,headteachers and deputy headteachers.

The questionnaire data relating to knowledge about Europe was furthersupported by a 20 statement true/false general knowledge quiz which covereda range of European topics including historical, political, geographical, economicand legal matters. The quiz was administered to the same pupils who hadcompleted the questionnaire. Whilst the test results should be treated with somecaution (due to some resulting ambiguity and nation-specific bias) they do givean indication of knowledge and provide a general background to the discussionof the relationship between knowledge and attitudes.

Definitions of the European Dimension in EducationA vast amount of literature has been published on the subject of the European

dimension in education. Many writers, attempting to define it as a concept, havefirst struggled with the question ‘What is Europe?’ and then with the term ‘theEuropean dimension’. Shennan (1991) summarises the controversy which hasbeen going on throughout the centuries between geographers, historians andphilosophers, and points out that ‘the subject can be interpreted at more than oneintellectual level’. If we consider the spatial organisation of landmass as ‘thecontinent of Europe’, the question arises as to where the eastern boundary lies.Prior to 1989, the presence of the Iron Curtain meant that most of our knowledgewas focused on Western Europe and the countries of the EC, but the emergenceof the eastern bloc countries has led to a reappraisal of what constitutes Europe.

2 Jo u rna l of M u ltiling ua l and M u lt ic u ltu ral D eve lopm en tD

ownl

oade

d by

[N

orth

east

ern

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

16

Oct

ober

201

4

Shennan, referring to ‘the limitations of a rigid geographical definition’, suggeststhe notion of a dynamic and diverse Europe, whose people share ‘commonbeliefs, values and ways of life’. Tulasiewicz (in King & Reiss, 1993) points outthat ‘confining the European Dimension to the European Community (EC) mayhelp to present a more compact whole, but it is also open to the accusation thatit ignores the rest of the world’. This view is expressed even more forcefully bySultana (1995). Indeed the danger of having a Eurocentric focus, or ‘fortressEurope’ approach may be counter-productive to the aims and objectives of theEuropean dimension. An EMIE/NFER report of 1991 puts it this way: ‘EuropeanAwareness should not mean for our young people a replacement of “LittleEnglanderism” by “little Europeanism”. It should be the first step towards anunderstanding of what it means to be a citizen of the world, to understand theissues that ultimately affect us all’. Heater (1992), on the other hand, makes adistinction between ‘awareness’ about Europe as a whole and ‘Europeancitizenship’ which he sees as firmly tied to the EU where a legal-political statuscan only be exercised through the context of a polity. However, Tulasiewicz (inKing & Reiss, 1993) reminds us that a discussion on Europe should also include‘all those recent Europeans who live in Europe but whose roots are in Morocco,Bangladesh or Turkey’.

If there is difficulty in defining the term ‘Europe’, there is no less difficulty inexplaining what is meant by the teaching of the European dimension. MaitlandStobart (in Shennan, 1991) sees the European dimension as a dynamic andevolving concept, involving education in Europe, education about Europe andeducation for Europe. For Brock & Tulasiewicz (1994) the European dimensionconsists of European knowledge — for pupils to be better informed about thecontinent of Europe, European skills — linguistic, communication, social,negotiation, travel — and European attitudes — enabling pupils to confirm acommitment to Europe. A similar idea is postulated by Tulasiewicz (in King &Reiss, 1993) when defining the scope of the European dimension, which includes‘disparate elements, such as knowledge, skills, attitudes and commitmentstaught at different times and under different headings’. Shennan (1991) regardsthe European dimension in the curriculum as a process leading to an improve-ment in ‘the quality and breadth of pupil knowledge by making Europe a newfocal point of normal school experience’. Whilst from a theoretical viewpointthere is little with which to disagree in these definitions of the Europeandimension, in practical terms no detailed research has yet been carried out to testtheir effectiveness and appropriateness for pupils in classrooms.

The impetus for a clearer understanding of the term ‘European dimension’came from the Resolution adopted by the Council of Ministers of Education on24 May 1988. A series of measures to be carried out both at member states leveland community level was launched with a view to strengthening the Europeandimension in education. As a follow-up to the Resolution, member states wererequired to publish their own policy statements, together with a report of activityundertaken to implement it. This, in turn, was reported on in a Commissiondocument SEC (91) 1753, which summarises the action taken by the memberstates and by the European Community, and contains a follow-up andassessment of the action taken. Broadly speaking, this report reveals similar

Pup ils’ Pe rc eption of E u ro pe 3D

ownl

oade

d by

[N

orth

east

ern

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

16

Oct

ober

201

4

findings across the member states (Tulasiewicz, in King and Reiss, 1993) butdifferent aspects are stressed by different states. Three ideas which are pursuedby all member states are as follows:

(1) The Community ideal, namely the belonging to the Community, the notionof European citizenship and working towards a European identity;

(2) A humanist ideal, namely the values and attitudes of peace, human rights,freedom, democracy;

(3) An international perspective based on multiculturalism, solidarity andintercultural education.

It is against this background of definitions of Europe, the European dimensionand European Citizenship that the study was undertaken. Because of the lack ofdefinition of Europe, some of the questions were left open to interpretation in thecontext of the wider continent of Europe and some were closely focused on theEU.

Analysis of DataIn order to better evaluate the understanding and knowledge of teenagers

about Europe and how that related to their scores in the quiz at the end of thequestionnaire the following question was first asked:

‘How well informed do you think you are about Europe ?’

Of the total sample, 58.4% of European teenagers felt very or quite well informed.When we look at how well this particular category of students scored on variousquiz questions, the following results emerge: on the relatively ‘easy’ question,There are 12 member states of the EC, (True/False) — 82.8% gave the correct answer.On the slightly harder question, Jacques Delors is President of the EuropeanParliament (True/False) — 51.2% scored correctly. On two economic questions, TheECU is worth less than 50p (True/False) (32.4% correct) and The Greek currency iscalled bouzouki (True/False) (18.8% correct) — there were clearly more difficultieson the level of understanding as well as of general knowledge. It is more difficultto explain the low score on what was considered a relatively ‘easy’ historicalquestion, The fall of the Berlin Wall signified the end of the Second World War(True/False) — only 18.9% correct. The average mark on the quiz was 11/12 outof 20.

If we compare perception of knowledge with actual test scores we obtain theresults shown in Table 1. There is a clear correlation between how the teenagersfelt about their knowledge and how that was displayed in the quiz results. It isworth noting the modesty of the Germans in not wishing to appear too wellinformed and yet coming second in the results, and the moderately high opinionof the English about their knowledge which is not borne out by the quiz resultswhere they came fifth.

The source of this knowledge was identified as three main areas. All studentscited the media as the most common source of information (53.9%), second camethe school (50.2%) and third the family/home (27.8%).

As far as the school goes, 66.8% of the total sample said that they had regularlessons about Europe (ranging from daily to once every few weeks). When asked


ownl

oade

d by

[N

orth

east

ern

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

16

Oct

ober

201

4

to specify more clearly the lessons in which knowledge about Europe wasimparted, the following pattern emerged: Geography 77.3%, History 67.3%,Mod. Langs. 59.8%, Politics/RE/Social studies 40.6%, Own Lang. 23.5%, Science13.3%, Sport 8.5%, Maths 6.4%.

The percentage of respondents who claimed that they received no informationabout Europe from School was relatively small with the Spanish the highest at17.5. However, when asked if they would like to know and understand moreabout Europe, those who responded positively gave reasons for their answersunder seven broad categories (drawn from (a) the interviews and (b) pupilcomment on the questionnaire):

(1) Work(a) I’d like to know more so that I’d be better prepared regarding work in

Europe and also be able to compare the Italian situation with the Europeanone. (It.)

(b) If I wanted to work in Europe I would want to know about it beforehand.(Eng.)

(2) Information and knowledge(a) I feel that we don’t get enough information from school and that it could be

far better taught. (Ger.)(b) I want to be better informed about what is happening outside my country. (It.)(c) Knowledge is the basis of all development. (It.)(d) I would like to know more about Europe because it helps you to understand

what is happening in the news and so you know which countries belong toEurope. (Eng.)

(e) We are not well enough informed. They need to make at least one TVchannel about Europe or a European newspaper. (Fr.)

(f) Because a lot happens in Europe. Because as I watch TV I don’t understandanything. (Fr.)

(3) Personal interest(a) I’d like to know more for personal interest because we live in Europe. (It.)(b) It gets a bit boring just knowing about your own country. If you go abroad

Country Felt well informed Mean quiz score

Holland 79.3 % 12.95France 65.0 % 11.34

Italy 64.3 % 11.27England 56.5 % 10.74

Germany 55.2 % 11.63Spain 28.7% 10.16

Table 1 ‘How well informed do you think you are about Europe?’ (very + quitewell informed conflated)


ownl

oade

d by

[N

orth

east

ern

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

16

Oct

ober

201

4

you will know more about the country you are going to and it will be moreenjoyable. (Eng.)

(4) Travel(a) I like to travel. (It.)(b) I like to know about Europe so that I can travel. I would know what to expect

when I go into another country. (Fr.)

(5) Communication and understanding

(a) It would be nice to know it more in depth and communicate with otherpeople. (It.)

(b) I think that it is important for teenagers and children to learn about Europewhile they are quite young so they can understand about other people’scultures and their way of living. (Eng.)

(c) Very little information about Europe is given in school. I think it would bebeneficial for the future of Europe if children understood more about it.(Eng.)

(d) Because it’s where we live and we’re badly informed about it. (Sp.)

(6) Language learning(a) I would like to know how the different countries live. I would like to learn

some other languages. (Eng)

(7) Citizenship

(a) Understanding each other better in Europe will lead to a greater overallunderstanding between countries. (Ger.)

(b) I feel we have too little information to make judgements. I would like toknow much more about politics and much less about geography. (Ger.)

(c) We are getting closer and working together as a big union and helping eachother and that’s better. (Eng.)

(d) As a citizen of Europe I’d like to be better informed so as to act in the bestway possible. (It.)

(e) We are the ‘new generation’ and as adults we are going to live in this world.It’s normal to want to know more about our future. We are badly informedabout ‘our’ Europe which belongs to all. (Fr.)

(f) I would like to be well informed about Europe and Maastricht because laterI will be a voter and for that it is necessary for me to have increased skills inorder to vote properly. (Fr.)

Their comments generally reveal a deep-felt need for more pertinent informa-tion to help them form their own opinions and make responsible judgements foractive citizenship. Examples of negative comments were along the followinglines:

I am against Europe (Ger.)

I am not bothered to listen to rubbish about Europe (Eng.)

I am only 15 and I don’t really see why we have to know anything about it


ownl

oade

d by

[N

orth

east

ern

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

16

Oct

ober

201

4

till I’m older because I’m interested in a lot more other things, such as boys.(Eng.)

From this data some initial conclusions may be drawn. Firstly, teenagersthroughout Europe find the topic interesting and have a reasonable grasp of theissues they see important. They would certainly like to enhance their knowledgefurther and to find ways to interpret more fully that knowledge gainedprincipally from the media. Secondly, they feel that they gain some understandingat school, but that it is inconsistent, incoherent and more often than not concernsgeographical and historical facts rather than political/cultural analysis or anopportunity for them to express their own opinions. Finally, the positivecomments far outnumber the negative ones. There is a hunger for informationand for understanding, for better communication skills and for travel opportu-nities, for work prospects and a genuine participation in the political process.

Europe through EuropeWhat contact with other European countries had the children in the sample

experienced and what significant effect did this have on their knowledge andattitudes? At first glance it would seem encouraging that 75.7% of respondentssaid they had been to another European country, the most travelled being theDutch and the Germans with an average of countries visited of 5.3 and 4.5respectively. The least travelled were the English and the Spaniards with anaverage of 1.5 and 1.3 countries visited respectively. However in order tounderstand better whether this encouraging figure (average for overall sample:2.7 countries visited) translates itself into greater awareness, knowledge orpositive attitudes towards Europe we need to look at the circumstances in whichthis travelling and visiting took place.

Respondents were asked whether they had been to another European countrywith their family, with friends or with school. A very high proportion ofrespondents who had travelled abroad had done so with family (74%) comparedwith friends 28.5% and school 36%. This is not a comforting result for thoseEuropean organisations endeavouring to promote mobility amongst youngpeople through educational institutions. If we break this down by country theimportance of the variable family/friends versus school becomes even moresignificant. For example 92.2% of Dutch children were able to visit otherEuropean countries with family compared to Spanish children (46.3%) and Italianchildren (45%). It soon becomes clear that the influence of family circumstanceson European children’s potential for experiencing Europe through Europe is verystrong. To what extent then did school make up for the inequality by nationalitythat family data exposed? Again there is a stark contrast between the compara-tively impressive number of French youngsters who have used the facility ofinstitutional travel, and Italian and Spanish youngsters (52.8%, 17.9% and 6.6%respectively). Clearly the taught foreign language (FL) factor is coming into playhere. Since a large amount of school travel is currently organised on the basis ofschool to school exchanges, it is much harder for Spanish and Italian schools torun exchanges with countries where those languages are not taught to any


ownl

oade

d by

[N

orth

east

ern

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

16

Oct

ober

201

4

significant degree. Conversely, few schools in England and Germany would beseeking to establish exchanges (based on FL provision) in Spain and Italy.

What, then, is the result of this greater mobility for the ‘central’ member statesas opposed to the Southern or peripheral ones (one would expect the same resultsfrom Portugal and Greece and, in terms of school mobility, for Denmark)?

Firstly the lack of mobility of Spanish children may well contribute to theexplanation for their low level of confidence in response to the question of howwell informed they thought they were. Certainly the high Dutch mobility willhave also contributed to the high test scores in the quiz. But this cannot be theonly factor when we consider the type of knowledge that pupils were gainingfrom travel. It is unlikely that this was knowledge related to European institutionsand law or, if travel was with family, to a high level of inter-cultural awareness.In the overall sample, 58.8% of those who had travelled abroad thoughtthemselves quite well informed as opposed to 45.6% of those who had not. Thisis a considerable difference but not a staggering one. In other words travelling toother European countries was not a major factor in pupils’ perception of theirknowledge and understanding about Europe. Moreover it would be dangerousto claim a direct cause and effect on test scores without also taking into accountthe influence of social class and ethnic origin (e.g., those in Social Group B had,on average, 11.7 correct answers; those in Group C2 had 10.6).

Europe and Language LearningAn equally important, if not quite so direct, experience of Europe is European

language learning. If we compare the number of languages learnt with howEuropean young people feel (see Table 2), we can at least postulate that whilst ahigh level of language learning might have a positive effect on pro-Europeanidentity (Netherlands), a low level of language learning does not necessarily havethe opposite effect (Spain). Thus language learning is by no means a clear factorin developing positive attitudes towards an integrated Europe.

When it comes to which languages are learnt in Europe, the dominance ofEnglish soon asserts itself with French and German in a struggling second place.With language learning as with mobility (and in many respects the two factorsare interrelated) we see a pattern emerging of a two-tier system in Europe wherethe Southern countries are not represented in the language learning process. Thisimbalance, of course, is not reflected either in terms of population ratios (within

One FL Two FLs Three FLs

England 38.1 57.5 4.4France 0.6 73.3 26.1

Germany 0.8 75.6 23.6Italy 36.4 51.4 12.1

Netherlands 0.9 1.7 97.4Spain 88.9 11.1 0

Total 29.8 51.3 18.9

Table 2 Percentage of pupils learning or having learnt FL(s)


ownl

oade

d by

[N

orth

east

ern

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

16

Oct

ober

201

4

the community) nor, in terms of percentage of world speakers (in the case ofSpain) nor in terms of comparative manufacturing output (in the case of Italy).Moreover when asked which European Community languages they thoughtshould be taught in school, the same hierarchy of languages presents itself. One hasto question, therefore, whether efforts to promote the learning and use of theUnion’s minority languages are doomed to failure.

Lack of language skills, however, were perceived as the greatest barrier bothto mobility in Europe and to the desire to know and understand more. Whenyoungsters were asked what would make it easier for them to go and work inanother European country, typical of the responses were:

Well, having a language { ¼ } having a skill that country needs most of all,learning the language well, that’s the only problem that could arise, as forthe rest I see no difficulties.

However when asked whether it was in their language classrooms that theyfelt they were obtaining knowledge about Europe nearly 30% of the overallsample of respondents said little knowledge. Even though this a minority it is asubstantial one and disappointing for those who hope to regard languageteachers as the main providers of exposure to European cultures.

What Kind of Europe?We have already observed that there is a significant variable when analysing

travelling abroad and country of origin. This pattern is, not surprisingly, repeatedwhen we consider travel in relation to parental occupation. Clearly one wouldexpect fewer families in social class D (46.1%) to be able to afford trips and/orresidence to other European countries than those in social classes A or B (88.1%and 65.4%). What researchers might ask, however, is whether education is havingan effect on the imbalance produced by social class. Here too the correlation ofsocial class and mobility through SCHOOL was evident: A 35.7%, B 30.1%, C129.7%, C2 27.5%, D 18.4%, U 12.8%. It is not possible from the questionnaire datato ascertain whether schools were attempting to facilitate mobility among theless financially privileged members of Europe’s youth. However, we do knowthat few schools in England are able to subsidise travel for underprivilegedchildren and interview data would tend to suggest that Europe’s educationalsystems are doing little to rectify disadvantage in mobility. Even in France (whichscored well in terms of mobility with school) teachers of a school in a social priorityarea saw difficulties in financing exchanges.

If there is a discrepancy in mobility because of social class, there is also onebecause of ethnic origin. Significantly fewer Asian children (40.2%) are travellingto Europe than whites (59.9%) with family. With school, the distinction is evenmore acute: Asians 9.8%, Whites 29.3%. This could be for religious or culturalreasons and although there was no significant difference between how wellinformed the two groups (Asian and Whites) perceived themselves as being,Asian children felt they got much less information about Europe from travellingwith 36.5% claiming they got none at all as opposed to their white counterpartswith 28.8%. This situation is made all the more poignant when we observe fromthe data that just as many Asians wanted to know more about Europe as Whites.


ownl

oade

d by

[N

orth

east

ern

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

16

Oct

ober

201

4

Consequently Asians did not feel at all European and Afro-Caribbeans even less,compared to Whites. It is not surprising therefore that Asians did not do well inthe quiz test as opposed to whites: AS 9.9 average correct answers to 11.3 forWhites.

The European Dimension For EuropeIn order to find any traces of education acting as a catalyst for the development

of a future Europe we have to look to the interview data. Even so what scantevidence there is of educating for European citizenship is found not at thenational, organised level but at best at the individual school level, if not at theindividual teacher level. No doubt this reticence of national governments to givea lead is influenced by educators’ inability to define what Education for EuropeanCitizenship is, and it is bolstered by the abuse of subsidiarity as an excuse foravoiding change. It is quite clear from teacher and pupil interviews that whatfew initiatives there are in responding to the call for a European dimension ineducation, are initiatives associated much more with the development ofawareness than citizenship. In only one instance was there evidence of a schoolhaving elements of a European dimension directly expressed in its mission aims.The data demonstrate that it is precisely the lack of a coherent national impetusthat is preventing an Education for Europe. Teachers in France, whilst recognis-ing that citizenship was part of the prescribed curriculum (for example in theModern Languages programme and in Education Civique), were well aware thatthis aspect could, in reality, be ignored. Whilst desiring a situation which sawmore understanding, less narrow-mindedness and an awareness that pupilsmight be able to get a job abroad, the influence in reality that the school had, theteachers thought, was not extensive. One French teacher claimed that ‘theperceptions of Europe are limited by the pupils’ ability to travel’, againsuggesting that school itself was not really compensating for the personalcircumstances of particular social groups. Italian teachers, having to resort topersonal initiatives largely financed out of their own pockets, bemoaned theinertia and lack of directive from central government. English teachers, over-whelmed by educational change, had placed the European dimension (let aloneeducating for European citizenship) quite firmly at the bottom of the list ofpriorities. Even among teachers who felt that Europe was integrated quitenormally into their language teaching, there was a feeling that so far this hadbeen about rather than for:

I should like to see more openness amongst the pupils to questions aboutEurope. They must have a dream if they are to make progress. (Germanteacher of English)

The interview data revealed one further important factor which no doubtdetermines how the European dimension is viewed and taught in schools.Virtually none of the teachers interviewed had been on an INSET course whichwas directly linked to the introduction of the European dimension in schools.Nor was there any special provision made in terms of special resources in orderto promote the European dimension. It is not surprising therefore that whenpupils were asked if they could remember doing anything about Europe, any


ownl

oade

d by

[N

orth

east

ern

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

16

Oct

ober

201

4

recollection of such an event in a lesson was always about (usually in thehumanities) or through (language learning and school exchanges). There was notmore than a handful of mentions of work directly related to EuropeanInstitutions, of work related to citizenship or of work related to the kinds of issuesraised in the questionnaire.

Attitudes to EuropeThe questionnaire data sheds light on the respondents’ attitudes to Europe

both directly and indirectly. The direct, global expression of views on Europewas elicited through, for instance, the question relating to identity. Table 5 showsa very positive tendency in this direction in five out of the six countries. Thispositive stance is further supported in the responses to the question: ‘Would youlike to know and understand more about Europe?’ 5.1% said ‘no’, 27.8% said theywere ‘not bothered’, and 67.1% said ‘yes’.

However, general statements alone do not give a clear picture of the nature ofthe attitudes they seek to define. In what sense do the teenagers think ofthemselves as Europeans: geographically, historically, culturally, ethnically,politically? Indeed it is probable that one person’s attachment to the idea ofEurope will not remain constant when considered through different perspec-tives. In order to sharpen the focus of our research, the survey asked the teenagersto state whether policy decisions should be made at national, EC, or both nationaland EC levels. The choice of wording here was deliberate. The research team feltthat at the time that the questionnaire was administered, pupils would be morefamiliar with the term ‘EC’ than with ‘EU’.

How do teenagers views on the EC compare with those of adults?Table 3 gives a summary of the overall response to the question about where

policy decision-making should take place on specific issues.

Which factors appear to have most influence over teenagers’ views onEurope?

The most striking feature of the overall pattern of responses to the question-naire is that on all issues except for health education, more females than malesthink that decisions should be made at an EC rather than a national level. Therelative pro-European female stance is repeated in each of the countriesrepresented. This gender difference, however, is reversed in an adult surveyreported in the Eurobarometer (EC, 1994). Other surveys also show women to beless enthusiastic than men on Europe (Mossuz-Lavan, 1991). The more positiveattitude of youth, with a greater open-mindedness and acceptance of new ideasfor the future, seems to express itself more readily through the attitudes of youngwomen. This is a reality which planners and promoters of the Europeandimension in schools would do well to bear in mind.

The pattern of responses also indicates some influence of social factors in theway teenagers think about Europe. Those whose parents were unemployed weremore likely to see national government as the place for policy decision-making.On 11 out of 14 issues it was this social category which registered the lowestEuropean score. There was no equivalent indication at the positive end of the


ownl

oade

d by

[N

orth

east

ern

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

16

Oct

ober

201

4

scale. Highest European scores here were more or less evenly distributedbetween youngsters from social class A families (4 issues), social class B families(4 issues), and social class D families (5 issues), with social class C1 families (1issue). But the percentage differences were in many cases statistically insignifi-cant. Ethnic origin, as we have seen earlier in a different context, also seems toplay a role in the teenagers’ attitudes towards Europe (see Table 4).

Perhaps unsurprisingly, a much greater proportion of white teenagers accepta European identity than do those from ethnic minority backgrounds. Clearly,Afro-Caribbeans and Asians living in Europe already have a dual identity andbelong to two cultures. The idea of assuming a third European identity may notbe popular. Or it may be that Europe is being presented to them as a union ofwhite states and cultures even though many member states are now multicultu-ral states. However, the figures show that a slightly larger proportion of Afro-Caribbeans and Asians feel they are partly European than do Whites. Whilst thismight be explained in purely statistical terms (if they are not totally they are morelikely to be partly) another explanation might be that ethnic minority groups are

Issue EC level National level Both

Bosnia 84.1 9.6 3.9The 3rd world 67.8 25.0 4.9

Race relations 67.1 24.8 5.1Drugs 61.8 32.8 3.8

Equal opportunities 65.8 33.6 3.4Pollution 53.4 40.4 4.1

Terrorism 55.1 39.3 4.3Immigration 60.7 34.0 2.7

Defence 39.4 47.9 1.8Crime 37.9 56.2 4.2

Health education 34.1 60.7 2.7Justice 31.3 58.8 4.7

Employment 25.0 71.5 1.7The family 16.9 78.0 2.5

Table 3 ‘Do you think that the following issues should be dealt with by thenational government or by EC?’

Afro-Caribbean Asian White Other

Not at all 50.0 48.4 20.8 9.2Partly 44.4 42.9 32.8 47.1

Totally 5.6 8.8 46.4 43.7

Table 4 ‘Do you think of yourself as European?’


ownl

oade

d by

[N

orth

east

ern

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

16

Oct

ober

201

4

much more comfortable with the idea of multinational identity and of coming toterms with accommodating their parents’ cultures and backgrounds with thoseof the home country of which they are citizens. There is a need here for furtherresearch.

Are there significant national differences in the attitudes of youthtowards Europe?

Direct responses to the question of European identity produced a significantdivergence between English (and to a lesser extent French) pupils and those ofthe other 4 countries, as shown in Table 5.

Elsewhere in the questionnaire the notion of ‘European unity’ was placedmore discreetly amongst a list of other important social and political issues. Ananalysis of variance applied to the pupils’ responses to this question, asking themto select and place in order of importance the ten most pressing issues in theirown country, shows that a higher rating was given to the issue of European unityby Spain and Italy, a higher rating for pollution by the northern Europeancountries (especially the Netherlands), and a higher rating given to the issue ofcorruption by Italy. In all these cases it can be assumed that teenagers reflect thedominant concerns of their country particularly as represented by their respec-tive media.

On the question of where decision making should occur, the French responsesscored the top pro-EU ratings on six, mainly social, issues; the Germans gave thehighest EU rating for justice, terrorism and defence (with Italy giving the lowestEU score in each of these); and the Italians gave the largest national pro-Europeanvote on the foreign affairs issues of Bosnia and the Third World, as well as onrace relations. The English yielded the lowest pro-European count in five cases.

It is also worth noting that except for race relations, a higher percentage ofSpanish teenagers think that decisions should be made at both national and EUlevels for every issue mentioned. Whilst the figures involved are low, the patterninvites some consideration. Could it be that, with the newly establishedautonomous regions in Spain, the Spanish people are more adapted to thinkingof government operating at both central and regional levels?

When asked for their views on changes which have already happened or mayhappen as a result of closer European unity, an interesting reversal occurs in pro-and anti-European stances in some cases (see Table 6).

Not at all Only partly Yes

England 39.8 41.6 18.6France 17.4 40.4 42.1

Germany 8.0 25.6 66.4Italy 4.3 41.0 54.7

Netherlands 2.6 7.0 90.4Spain 6.4 25.1 68.4

Table 5 ‘Do you think of yourself as European?’


ownl

oade

d by

[N

orth

east

ern

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

16

Oct

ober

201

4

Although there was no majority from any country in favour of the general ideaof more decision-making taking place in Strasbourg rather than in the nationalparliament, there was, on the other hand, a majority in each country favouringgreater uniformity of education and training across member states. As furtherexample of the indeterminate nature of the attitudes held on Europe, it is worthnoting that whilst the Dutch respondents expressed very strong pro-Europeanviews elsewhere in the questionnaire (and in particular in global terms), in thissection they registered the highest negative vote in four out of five cases.Conversely, the Spanish respondents, who declared a lack of knowledge onEurope, registered the highest pro-European vote in four out of five questions inthis section as well as the second highest in terms of European identity (Table 5).

ConclusionThe research provides strong evidence that in the six years following a high

profile ministerial resolution, the introduction of the European dimension intothe curriculum of European schools is at best patchy or incoherent, and at worstnon-existent. Do the necessary conditions exist, however, for the development ofthe European dimension?

Analysis of the data collected shows that there is a thirst for knowledge andan enthusiasm to participate amongst most young people in Europe. They feelbadly served by a media, either unable to explain and de-mystify complexEuropean issues, or unwilling to present anything but the most confrontationalevents in the partnership process. They feel badly served (and in an adult futuredisenfranchised) by schools unable to find space within their curricula for thetype of learning that would deepen not only their knowledge and understandingof European institutions but also an appreciation of their neighbours’ culturalsimilarities.

Education is providing young people with some opportunities to travel withinEurope and organisations which facilitate this are to be applauded. Howeveryoung people from some countries are at a disadvantage as are some social andethnic groups. Future planning needs to consider strategies for decreasing if not

Change In favour Not bothered AgainstThe national currency is replacedby the ECU

Italy 83.6%Total 38.3%

Spain 38.2%Total 26.9%

England 45.9%Total 38%

More decisions affecting your lifeare taken in Strasbourg, instead of home capital

France 30.3%Spain 30.2%Total 14.1%

Germany 60.2%Total 37%

Netherlands 67%Total 47.1%

Working without restriction in EU member states


England 35.6%Total 23.6%

Netherlands 23.5%Total 16.9%

EU citizens able to vote in country of residence regardless of nationality

Italy 70%Total 53.7%


France 27%Netherlands 27.8%Total 21.3%

Greater uniformity of education and training



Netherlands 25.2%Total 7.5%

Table 6 Countries scoring highest (%) for each ‘change’ compared to overallpercentage scores


ownl

oade

d by

[N

orth

east

ern

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

16

Oct

ober

201

4

eliminating these disadvantages. In addition, the effect of language learning onpromoting positive attitudes needs further research.

National governments, must take a lead by creating the framework withinwhich the aims of the resolution can be achieved by clearly earmarking resourcesfor pre-service and in-service training. They need also to act upon the evidencethat without a coherent and compulsory programme of ED within nationalcurricula, ministerial statements of intent will not bring about the desiredchanges in schools.

The research found little or no evidence of teacher or headteacher resistance,in principle, to the development of the European dimension in schools. Indeedthe following statement from a teacher interview is an exemplar if not an exampleof the attitude of the professionals:

I’m against any type of barrier or any type of preclusion whether it’sideological, political or psychological as long as we conserve the conceptthat each country can keep its own identity and I hope that it will be schoolteachers who will be able to teach the children to accept EuropeanCitizenship.

The message from the survey to teachers in the English system is that they,more than others, need to foster a greater awareness among pupils of the partthat they can play as citizens of the European Union and as participants in aninter-cultural network. They need also to provide young people with informationabout the opportunities available to them in the world of work. There is scopefor research into whether those attitudes can best be fostered in an across-the-curriculum model or through key subjects. An attempt at a curriculum modelis made in Convery et al. (1997).

It may be that the search for a definition of European Citizenship in educationmay serve teachers and learners better as a process than the European dimensionas a product. It is in the dialectic of that process that the planning, implementationand monitoring of the European dimension in schools will see its most effectivere-evaluation. The European dimension will then present itself as a continuumof a possible curricula (not as a fixed syllabus with a defined content) from, atone end, an experience limited to knowledge, through a central ground of contactwith Europe at first hand, to a genuine participation and active involvement inthe making of the European Union. Perhaps it is only through experiencing thatjourney, through the continuum as process, that teachers and learners alike willbe able to arrive at a clearer understanding of what concepts such as identity,citizenship and solidarity entail. Through that process they may eventually be ina better position to exercise their rights and fulfil their obligations.

ReferencesBrock, C. and Tulasiewicz, W. (eds) (1994) Education in a Single Europe. London: Routledge.Convery, A. et al. (1997) Pupils’ Perceptions of Europe. London: Cassell.EMIE/NFER (1991) Report on European Awareness. Slough: NFER.European Commission (EC) (1988) Resolution of the 24th May 1988 by the European Council

of Ministers of Education. Brussels: ECEuropean Commission (EC) (July 1994) Eurobarometer 41. Brussels: EC.


ownl

oade

d by

[N

orth

east

ern

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

16

Oct

ober

201

4

Heater, D. (1992) Education for European Citizenship. Westminster Studies in Education 15,53–67.

King, A.S. and Reiss, M.J. (eds) (1993) The Multicultural Dimension of the NationalCurriculum. London: Falmer Press.

Mossuz-Lavan, J. (1991) Women and men of Europe today: Attitudes towards Europe andpolitics. Women of Europe 35, 12–21.

Mulcahy, D.G. (1991) In search of the European dimension in education. European Journalof Teacher Education 4 (3), 213–26.

Shennan, M. (1991) Teaching about Europe. London: Cassell.Sultana, R.G. (1995) A uniting Europe, a dividing education? International Studies in

Sociology of Education 5 (2), 115–44.Tulasiewicz, W. (1993) The European dimension in the National Curriculum. In A.S. King

and M.J. Reiss (eds) The Multicultural Dimension of the National Curriculum. London:Falmer Press.


ownl

oade

d by

[N

orth

east

ern

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

1:21

16

Oct

ober

201

4

Documents

An Investigative Study into Pupils' Perceptions of Europe