International Journal of Educational Development 32 (2012) 214–223

Young people, citizenship and citizenship education in Zimbabwe

Aaron T. Sigauke *

School of Education, King’s College, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB24 5UA, Scotland, UK

A R T I C L E I N F O

Keywords:

Citizenship education

Anti-social behaviour

Attitudes

Participation level

Civic knowledge

Political conflict

A B S T R A C T

Citizenship education in Zimbabwe is based on the claim that young people lack citizenship virtues. This

study set out to investigate these assumptions by assessing high school students’ knowledge of, attitudes

towards and participation levels in citizenship issues. Findings show that while students are

knowledgeable about citizenship issues they are however, hesitant about involvement in political

activities. The study concludes that the reported claims are partly not valid. In a politically sensitive

environment students are unwilling to engage in political activities. They accurately assess the situation

and adopt a position which other citizens in similar circumstances might take.

� 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Educational Development

jo ur n al ho m ep ag e: ww w.els evier . c om / lo cat e/ i jed u d ev

1. Introduction

. . .we know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of societybut the youth of our country themselves. . . we must educatethem (Presidential Commission, 1999: 353).

1.1. The context: Zimbabwe’s political, economic and social

background

Over the last two decades Zimbabwe has been going through adownturn in political, social and economic conditions attributed tothe introduction of harsh legislation against democratic dissent bycivic organisations, labour movements, opposition political move-ments, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), churches andstudent demonstrations as they demanded a recognition of theirrights as citizens (Hammett, 2010; Zeilig, 2008). As a result thecountry has been characterised by hyper-inflation, social haemor-rhage and political conflict. Over the years and in the context ofthese worsening conditions government popularity has continuedto decline drastically. The response of authorities to these eventshas, in some cases, been further political suppressions. Theseinclude the closing of the space for democratic debates throughmedia control, for example the 2002 Access to Information andProtection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) which allowed state media tobroadcast ideological messages on behalf of the state, the 1993Land Designation Act which led to violent occupation of farmlandand the displacement of farm owners and workers, and the PublicOrder and Security Act (POSA) (Raftopoulos, 2007a; Raftopoulos,2007b; Raftopoulos, 2002; Bond and Manyanya, 2002). Added to

* Tel.: +44 1224 4822.

E-mail addresses: a.sigauke@abdn.ac.uk, aaron_2001zim@yahoo.co.uk.

0738-0593/$ – see front matter � 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.ijedudev.2011.02.014

the above was ‘Operation Murambatsvina/Restore Order’ of 2005,euphemistically described as the ‘tsunami’. While this was meantto ‘restore order’ by destroying unplanned and illegal accommo-dation and business structures it was violent, indiscriminate andmade people homeless mostly in the low income residential areas(Fontein, 2009). These events bring up questions about what itmeans to be a citizen, who is a citizen, and if citizenship is aboutpractising democratic values (Griffith,1998 in Tshabangu, 2006),tolerance, participation and empowerment how do these events inZimbabwe help in understanding the concept citizenship?Furthermore, if a government proposes to introduce citizenshipeducation in the school curriculum, like the Zimbabweangovernment has done, in the above context what form does thatprogramme take?

This paper discusses a study set out to explore these questionsthrough an investigation of claims in the Presidential Commissionreport about young people’s lack of citizenship values by assessinghigh school students’ knowledge of, attitudes towards andparticipation levels in citizenship issues before the introductionof citizenship education in schools.

1.2. The Presidential Commission and its recommendations

It is within the above context that in 1998 a governmentappointed commission was tasked ‘‘to investigate the need forfundamental changes to the current curriculum at all levels’’(Presidential Commission, 1999: i). It is not very clear whether ornot the appointment of this commission was influenced by theabove political, economic and social events in the country.However, a critical discourse analysis of the citizenship educationchapter of the commission’s report (Sigauke, 2011a) shows apotential bias in the agenda for the appointment of thecommission. The following is a brief background to the establish-ment of the commission.

A.T. Sigauke / International Journal of Educational Development 32 (2012) 214–223 215

After independence in 1980 major reforms made in theeducation sector and viewed as central in addressing thedevelopmental needs of the country included the de-racialisationof the education system, changes in the curriculum, an increase instudent enrolments and infrastructural developments (Peresuh,1998; Zvobgo, 1996). However, up to 1998 no comprehensivereview had been carried out on the education system. ThePresidential Commission was therefore tasked to do this. Thecommission had twelve members of various backgrounds includ-ing education, religion, commerce and the civil service. As part ofits overall terms of reference the commission was instructed to:

inquire into and report upon the fundamental changes to thecurrent curriculum at all levels so that education becomes auseful tool for character and citizenship formation (PresidentialCommission, 1999: 349).

Subsequently a compulsory and statutory citizenship educationcomponent to the school curriculum was recommended. Accord-ing to the commission during public debates young people wereblamed for anti-social behaviour attributed to lack of citizenshipvalues, relevant ethics, morals and individual and collectiveresponsibility towards property. Furthermore, young people wereblamed for lacking knowledge about the meaning and qualitiesassociated with good citizenship.

Citizenship and citizenship education are controversial andsometimes subjectively defined concepts (Osler and Starkey,2005). In such a deteriorating political context and given thiscontroversy about citizenship and citizenship education, is it notlikely that these claims could be used as an excuse to introduce aprogramme with underlying motives meant to silence youngpeople? Furthermore, claims about young people’s lack ofcitizenship values and the need for citizenship education werebased on information collected from the public and not directlyfrom or through research on young people. Voices of young peopleand learners and their thoughts on these issues need to beincorporated in policy development if policies are to empowerlearners since it is learners who are affected by policy changes.There is a need for research directed towards exploring andunderstanding how young people construct meanings of citizen-ship from their everyday experiences. For young people the schoolprovides such an opportunity.

In the commission report young people are characterised asanti-social and that ‘‘currently children leave primary andsecondary school with scanty and incorrect knowledge’’(Presidential Commission, 1999: 351) of citizenship issues yetcitizenship education ‘‘enables children to grow into goodcitizens who conform to certain accepted practices, trains themto hold beliefs . . .to be good citizen’’ (ibid). Thus the commissionrecommends ‘‘a strong and compulsory civic education pro-gramme in our schools and society to ensure the reception andacceptance of our values, ethics and civic processes by all ouryouths’’ (ibid). However, the question is, to what extent ishaving a citizenship education programme in the schoolcurriculum a guarantee for young people’s civic participation?Mintrop (2003: 446) comments that in some cases suchprogrammes are just ‘‘an uncritical homage to powerful leaders’’the danger being that ‘‘in the long run democracy cannot survivewithout civic engagement’’ (p. 384). Genuine civic participationis partly an outcome from appropriate civic knowledge and skillswhich are important in filtering, unmasking and identifyingfacts from non-facts (Maiello et al., 2003), biased from non-biased information, rhetoric and manipulative information andexposing hidden intentions in political discourse (Fairclough,1995).

1.3. Citizenship and citizenship education: controversies

There are a number of controversies concerning the conceptcitizenship and the role that citizenship education plays in societyespecially in situations of conflict. Davies (2001) for example,observes that the nature of citizenship education a country adoptsis greatly influenced by the political context and ideology of thestate. In the case of Zimbabwe the commission views citizenshipeducation as a basis for the creation of good citizens who wouldcarry out duties and responsibilities in communities and thenation, and that it would help in the search for solutions topolitical, economic, social and ecological problems the countryfaced (Presidential Commission, 1999). Schools are expected toenhance among students an awareness of rights, responsibilitiesand duties, respect for communities, and participation in civicmatters at the local, national and international levels. Ifcitizenship is a controversial and contested concept as Oslerand Starkey (2005) note, being a ‘good citizen’ is similarlycontroversial and contestable. In this sense, and as defined bygovernment, a good citizen could have meant someone whounquestioningly accepts and conforms to values, norms andbeliefs as defined by authority. It seems that moulding youngpeople to be ‘good citizens’ as stated by the commission couldhave meant a political process that would make young peoplecompliant to the demands of those in power.

As pointed out above citizenship and citizenship education aresites of political struggle and contested terrains. There is not oneobjective and universal meaning of citizenship. It is subjected to adiversity of meanings and interpretations, some for personaladvantages, and therefore may be abused whenever citizenshipeducation policies are proposed. Within the African Sub-Saharanregion a number of countries emerging from conflict situationshave also put in place citizenship education programmes inattempts to unite previously divided societies, for example post-apartheid South Africa (Staeheli and Hammett, 2010; Hammettand Staeheli, 2009; Schoeman, 2006). Other countries in the regionhave also implemented similar programmes after the introductionof multi-party democracy, examples include Malawi (Divala,2007), Zambia (Abdi et al., 2005) and Tanzania (Bertz, 2007).However, as Divala comments about Malawi, in most casescitizenship education is used to undermine the same democraticdispensation that it is supposed to develop. This is becausecitizenship education can be a useful tool for the political elite toideologically perpetuate their hegemonic positions over thedisadvantaged in society. It is used to ‘‘emphasize responsibilitiesand respect for those in power and to encourage a sense ofuncritical patriotism’’ (Osler and Starkey, 2005: 1).

Democracy, as with the concept of citizenship, is a controversialand contested concept. There is a plethora of democracies thatdiffer from one another, varying from one social, political,economic and cultural context to another (Enslin and Horsthemke,2004). This is perhaps why some states which claim to bedemocratic have questionable practices that do not meetuniversally acceptable principles of democracy. In the widerAfrican context while some states have and are making attempts atdemocratisation through multi-party democracy (Erdmann andBasedau, 2008) others are still autocratic. A number of factorsworking against the realisation of democracy include lack ofprotection of political and civil rights, prevalence of authoritariantendencies, tempering of electoral process, structural inhibitionsthat are supported by ruling elites and what Okumu (2005) refersto as the ‘‘ethnicisation of politics’’ (p.1).

However, there are cases on the continent where oppositionpolitical parties have been and are being active in challengingruling political parties. They do so through choosing to participateor boycott elections and to accept or reject election results

A.T. Sigauke / International Journal of Educational Development 32 (2012) 214–223216

(Lindberg, 2006). This, in some way, indicates a changing politicalprocess in the African context.

Outside the African context countries in post conflict situationssimilar to those in the African Sub-Saharan region have also usedcitizenship and citizenship education as tools to try and bridgedivisions in their societies. Examples include Northern Ireland(McEvoy, 2007), the Republic of Ireland (Murphy, 2006), Argentineand Costa Rico (Suarez, 2008). The situation in Zimbabwe is inmany ways similar to the position of some of these states. Researchon citizenship education policies in the above states shows adiversity of aims for the introduction of these programmes ineducation, with hidden agendas in some cases. This raisesquestions about the nature and purpose of the citizenshipeducation programme proposed for Zimbabwe. This paperdiscusses these issues with reference to a study conducted onstudents in Zimbabwe prior to the implementation of thecitizenship education programme in schools in the country.

2. Factors impacting on young people’s knowledge of, attitudestowards and participation levels in citizenship matters

Literature on young people’s knowledge of, attitudes towardsand participation levels in citizenship issues indicate variationsdepending on young people’s age, gender, family socio-economicstatus, school factors and the differing historical–political orienta-tions of their countries. The study in Zimbabwe took into accountthree of these factors: age, gender and school location.

The age at which political socialisation takes place is importantin determining the future orientation of a young person towardscitizenship issues, the most important foundation being at arelatively early age (Hooghe and Stolle, 2004). Research shows thatmuch of the foundation for political life is already in place by thetime the young person reaches adulthood, meaning that politicalsocialisation at adulthood tends to be more limited than it is at ayounger age. Attitudes towards political issues are generallyshaped at an earlier age in life. Thus experiences at adulthood seemto have little effect on political characteristics acquired early in thelife cycle of a person (Uslaner, 2002). These views imply thatparticipation in and discussions of current political events may bemost effective when they are offered at an early age.

With regards to gender, literature on women’s participation inpolitical activities indicates a gap between males and females(Conway, 2000). Research has shown that women tend toparticipate less in political life, are less politically interested andare under-represented in parliaments compared to their malecounterparts (Hooghe and Stolle, 2004). Feminist and other criticalresearchers, for instance Burns (2002), have however, challengedthis as a gender determinism thesis and argue that females are asmuch interested in politics as their male counterparts but areinhibited by factors from socialisation and internalisation ofgender roles which include the segregation of females in maledominated public political institutions, family commitments, andless resource availability for women. It has been shown that in factfemales are very active especially in the domestic sphere regardedby the male dominated society as irrelevant to citizenship. Forinstance, voter turnout in many countries is greater for femalesthan it is for males. Females are also very active in social movementactivities. Thus it is not ‘natural’ that females are less interested inpolitics than males. This is socially constructed. As for young girlsthe problem is that they get socialised into a life that tends tosegregate them from males in everyday political activities. InZimbabwe a persistent gender inequality, with fewer women ascandidates at political elections, has been the case since thecountry’s independence (EISA, 2000; Chiroro, 2005). This hassimilarly been so in other parts of Africa. While attempts are beingmade to increase the number of women in the legislature, Tanzania

for instance (Yoon, 2011), concerns are being raised for womenpolitical empowerment that goes beyond just increasing numbersin the legislature. The study conducted in Zimbabwe comparedmale and female student views on these issues.

Family socio-economic factors, which also may determine thetype of school the child attends, are crucial in determining youngpeople’s orientation on citizenship issues. From their study Maielloet al. (2003) concluded that family socio-economic status is a goodpredictor of civic knowledge and indirectly of civic participation. Inaddition to family socio-economic factors conclusions from theInternational Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achieve-ment (IEA) study indicate that schools that model democraticpractices are generally most effective in promoting civic knowledgeand engagement among their students (Torney-Purta et al., 2001).An open classroom climate, for example, allows students to expressthemselves freely, an important factor in creating positive civicattitudes among students. Hooghe and Stolle (2004) however, notethat while an open classroom climate may encourage discussions itis not always a predictor of the likelihood to vote in elections atadulthood. This is because, as Roldao (2003: 458) notes, ‘‘the qualityof that classroom participation also makes a significant difference asa predictor’’. These issues were included in the study in Zimbabwe.

Studies elsewhere have also shown that children coming fromdiverse socio-cultural backgrounds adopt more interactive posi-tions on key social issues that prevail in society than where this isnot the case (McGlynn, 2004). This is similarly the case whereschools teach the importance of voting as part of the curriculumand which encourage student membership of and involvement inorganisations at the school level (Torney-Purta and Richardson,2002). Thus teaching of citizenship issues that allow students to goout and participate in communities is viewed as important incontributing to lasting civic values and identity in young people.Willingness to volunteer at adulthood is often a result of attitudescultivated at young age (Hooghe and Stolle, 2004). The Zimbabwestudy looked at student participation in civic activities at theschool and local community levels.

With regards to the historical-political background of the homecountry Mintrop (2003) argues that for some countries the choiceof what counts as the most and least important topics in civiceducation depends on the political ideology and events in thecountry. For example, regarding the concept of democracyHusfeldt and Nikolova (2003) conclude that generally this differsfrom one country to another depending on the dominant politicalideology. These issues are important in understanding the natureand purpose of citizenship education proposed for Zimbabwe.

3. Research setting and focus

Schools in Zimbabwe are classified as either public (govern-ment) or privately owned. New programmes such as the proposedcivic education are often piloted in government administeredschools in both rural and urban settings. Rural governmentsecondary schools draw many of their students from surroundingvillages. In spite of similarities in school administration differencesin terms of socio-economic circumstances may affect students’orientations towards citizenship issues. For this reason this studyfocuses on students in government secondary schools at twodifferent locations, one rural and another urban. The studyinvestigates the position of students regarding citizenship issuesprior to the introduction of citizenship education in schools. It isguided by the following questions:

� What is the knowledge level of students on matters ofcitizenship?� What attitudes do students hold towards issues of citizenship?

A.T. Sigauke / International Journal of Educational Development 32 (2012) 214–223 217

� What is the participation level of students in citizenshipactivities in their schools and communities?

4. Methods

4.1. Sample and sampling

One hundred and sixty-one (161) students (80 males and 81females) at the junior and middle secondary school levels and agedbetween 13 and 18 years took part in this study. At that time theywere taking Geography, History and Education for Living as part oftheir curriculum, subjects in which the commission says civic issuesare covered at the secondary school level in Zimbabwe. It is also atthese levels that the proposed civic education programme was to beimplemented. An analysis of the syllabi for the above subjects showsthat while none of them mentions the concept citizenship some ofthe content and suggested teaching approaches could be relevant toan understanding of citizenship issues. They suggest a concentricapproach which focuses first on the student, then local, national andinternational communities. With regards to content the Geographyand Education for Living syllabi have more in common than they dowith History. Both aim at developing learners’ social and technicalskills and their attitudes while the History syllabus aims at gettingstudents understand local, national and international historicalevents. However, much of its content is about Zimbabwe’s politicalevents and government structures, comparing pre- and post-independence periods. In all three subjects little is said aboutdeveloping critical and analytic qualities which may empowerlearners so that they understand and are able to debate currentevents around them. Some topics from these three subjects arerepeated in the proposed civics education syllabus.

4.2. Instrumentation

The questionnaire used in 1999 by the International Associationfor the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) was adapted forthe study in Zimbabwe. The IEA is an independent consortium ofcooperating national institutions and government research agenciesin more than 50 countries. It conducts comparative studies thatfocus on educational policies and practices in member countries toenhance learning within and across systems of education around theworld (Torney-Purta et al., 2001). In 1999 it carried out a study oncivic education in 28 countries aimed at assessing young people’sknowledge of, attitudes towards and participation levels in civicmatters at the school level. The IEA instrument was selected becausethe Zimbabwe study focused on similar issues and was administeredto students of similar age groups as those in the IEA study. However,since Zimbabwe is a different context a pilot study had to beconducted resulting in changes on language, item sequence anddeletion of some inappropriate items.

All items in the original IEA instrument had previously beenstatistically tested for reliability and validity. A detailed discussionconcerning instrument construction and tests for reliability andvalidity are covered in Torney-Purta et al. (2001), Nikolova andLehmann (2003) and Schulz and Sibberns (2004).

4.3. Data presentation

Items testing for student knowledge of citizenship content andskills of interpretation of civic information are grouped into three‘domains’ (Torney-Purta et al., 2001):

� Democracy.� Sense of national identity, regional and international relation-

ships.� Sense of social cohesion and diversity.

Tests were carried out to assess whether or not there were anystatistically significant differences in student performance on thecitizenship test by gender, school grade/class and school location.Data from a survey of the students’ attitudes and participationlevels are presented in tables. These were calculated from Likertscale values. Survey items on attitudes and participation levelsasked students to indicate their level of agreement with itemsranging from strongly agree (five) to strongly disagree (one).

5. Findings

5.1. Test on civic knowledge and skills of interpretation of political

information

The commission states that young people leave school withscanty knowledge of what citizenship entails and that they haveincorrect knowledge of their history, heritage, moral and ethicalvalues. This study raised and investigated the following questionabout the above claims:

� What are the students’ levels of knowledge of civic content andskills of interpretation of civic/political information?

There were 24 multiple-choice items on the test each with onlyone correct option. This analysis looks at the overall studentperformance on the 24 items and also compares performance bygender, school grade/class and school location. It also analysesstudent performance on each of the three domains identified above.

5.1.1. Performance on the whole test

Table 1 shows a mean score of 13.4 out of the 24 items for all the161 students. There is a statistically significant difference(significance level, p = 0.001) between scores of the two classeswith the senior class having a higher score than the juniors. Thismay be expected as it could be due to differences in the age oracademic levels at which they were studying.

5.1.2. Student distribution on correct options by domains

Table 2 identifies items by domains, knowledge and skills itemson each domain; and student numbers selecting correct option oneach item. Generally more students correctly answered itemstesting for knowledge of citizenship content (recall items) thanthose who did so for items testing for skills of interpretation ofinformation. This is further confirmed by findings in Table 3. On thewhole students had a higher score on the knowledge items (scoreK = 9.00 or 60%) than on items testing for skills of interpretation(score I = 4.40 or 48.9%).

The analysis also compared student performance by gender,school grade/class and school location (Table 4). As expected, thereare statistically significant differences by school grade/class withsenior students scoring better than juniors.

5.2. Understanding of some key concepts on citizenship

In addition students were tested on their understanding ofthree key concepts: democracy, government responsibility andcitizenship.

On nine out of ten items over half of students distinguishedbetween statements describing democratic from non-democraticcharacteristics. However, they were almost equally divided on theitem concerning whether or not having many political parties in acountry was good for democracy with a third saying it is bad fordemocracy, less than half saying this is good for democracy. Againexcept for two items concerning involvement in political activities,each of the other ten items had over half of students approving

Table 1Student performance on the whole test (N = 161).

Student characteristics Number of correct items out of the 24 (score)

Min. score Max. score Mean score S. D. ANOVA values and significance levels

All students (N = 161) 4.0 21.0 13.4 3.8 n/a

Gender Boys (N = 80) 5.0 20.0 13.8 3.8 Value (F) = 1.530

Girls (N = 81) 4.0 21.0 13.0 3.8 p = 0.218

School class Form 2 (N = 77) 4.0 20.0 12.3 3.9 Value (F) = 11.900

Form 4 (N = 84) 5.0 21.0 14.3 3.4 p = 0.001

School location Rural (N = 84) 6.0 21.0 13.4 3.9 Value (F) = 0.001

Urban (N = 77) 4.0 19.0 13.4 3.8 p = 0.973

Table 2Student distribution on correct options of the citizenship test.

Item domain No. and % of students choosing the correct option (highest to lowest)

Items testing for knowledge of

citizenship content

Items testing for skills of

interpretation of information

Item no. Correct option, no.

and % of students

Item no. Correct option, no.

and % of students

Democracy: 5 C 135 (83.9) 24 C 131 (81.4)

3 B 120 (74.5) 16 B 79 (49.1)

(Principles of democracy; 17 C 116 (72.0) 15 D 75 (46.6)

democratic institutions; 6 A 103 (64.0) 22 A 55 (34.2)

citizenship issues) 18 D 94 (58.4) 13 B 26 (16.1)

25 D 94 (58.4)

20 B 84 (52.2)

9 B 81 (50.3)

14 B 80 (49.7)

2 A 67 (41.6)

7 C 62 (38.5)

Sense of national identity, regional and international relationships 8 B 132 (82.0) 21 A 111 (68.9)

19 C 131 (81.4) 11 A 80 (49.7)

23 D 73 (45.3) 12 A 78 (48.4)

Social cohesion and diversity: (discrimination; social inclusion) 4 B 77 (47.8) 10 D 70 (43.5)

Total items 15 9

A.T. Sigauke / International Journal of Educational Development 32 (2012) 214–223218

them as important for good citizenship. For these studentsinvolvement in political activities is not a good citizenship quality.A statistically significant difference was recorded between ruraland urban students (significance level, p = 0.038) with more urbanthan rural students identifying statements they regarded asgovernment responsibilities.

5.3. Attitudes towards selected key citizenship issues

The commission accuses young people for anti-social behaviourwhich it says is a reflection of their negative attitudes towards

Table 3Student performance on the three domains of the test.

Domain No

Democracy items testing for skills of interpretation of information (DEMI) 5

Democracy items testing for knowledge of citizenship content (DEMK) 11

Sense of national identity, regional and international relationships items

testing for skills of interpretation of information (NII)

3

Sense of national identity, regional and international relationships items

testing for knowledge of citizenship content (NIK)

3

Social Cohesion and Diversity items testing for skills of interpretation of

information (SCDI)

1

Social Cohesion and Diversity items testing for knowledge of citizenship

content (SCDK)

1

Total items for skills of interpretation of information (score – I) 9

Total items for citizenship content knowledge (score – K) 15

Score on test 24

citizenship issues and activities. This study raised the followingquestion concerning this claim:

� What are the attitudes of students towards issues of citizenshipand citizenship education?

Findings on this question are presented in Table 5.Students were asked to indicate how often they trusted some

government-related institutions, especially the media. The mainsources of news in Zimbabwe are the electronic and mass media(television, radio and newspapers). However, the state has a major

. of items Min. score Max. score Mean score S.D.

0.00 5.00 2.27 1.05

1.00 11.00 6.45 2.20

0.00 3.00 1.70 0.90

0.00 3.00 2.10 0.87

0.00 1.00 0.44 0.50

0.00 1.00 0.48 0.50

0.00 8.00 4.40 (48.9%) 1.70

2.00 15.00 9.00 (60.0%) 2.71

4.00 21.00 13.38 3.79

Table 5Student Likert scale scores on attitudes towards citizenship issues.

Section Section content Total section scores Minimum score Maximum score Mean score (%)

A Trust in govt. institutions 35.00 11.00 33.00 23.49 (67)

B Women’s rights 50.00 18.00 50.00 39.29 (79)

C Migrants and migration 40.00 13.00 40.00 27.80 (70)

D Political systems and activities 35.00 7.00 34.00 20.45 (58)

Table 4Student classifications; mean scores and significance levels of differences on the different domains.

Student characteristics Mean scores and significance levels of differences in the mean scores on each domain (ANOVA)

DEMK DEMI NIK NII SCDK SCDI SCORE K (Content) SCORE I (Skills)

Gender Mean score: Boys 0.5955 0.4800 0.7125 0.5625 0.4750 0.5000 0.6108 0.5097

Mean score: Girls 0.5746 0.4296 0.6790 0.5514 0.4815 0.3704 0.5893 0.4636

ANOVA value (F) 0.437 2.341 0.546 0.056 0.007 2.765 0.570 2.541

Sig. level (p) 0.509 0.128 0.461 0.813 0.935 0.098 0.451 0.113

School class Mean score: Form 2 0.5384 0.4182 0.6883 0.5108 0.3896 0.3377 0.5584 0.4401

Mean score: Form 4 0.6277 0.4881 0.7024 0.5992 0.5595 0.5238 0.6381 0.5291

ANOVA value (F) 8.441 4.563 0.096 3.659 4.727 5.798 8.152 9.893

Sig. level (p) 0.004 0.034 0.757 0.058 0.031 0.017 0.005 0.002

School location Mean score: Rural 0.6028 0.4500 0.6627 0.5278 0.4881 0.4286 0.6071 0.4735

Mean score: Urban 0.5655 0.4597 0.7316 0.5887 0.4675 0.4416 0.5922 0.5007

ANOVA value (F) 1.409 0.086 2.331 1.720 0.067 0.027 0.273 0.873

Sig. level (p) 0.237 0.770 0.129 0.192 0.796 0.869 0.602 0.351

A.T. Sigauke / International Journal of Educational Development 32 (2012) 214–223 219

monopoly on the media. This is facilitated by laws such as theBroadcasting Services Act of 2001 and the Access to Informationand Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) of 2002 both of which makeit difficult for the private media to operate and for people to getalternative views other than that of government alone (Rafto-poulos, 2007a). A mean score of 23.4 (67%) was recorded.However, about two thirds never or only sometimes trustedlocal councils while over three quarters never trusted politicalparties. A comparison by school grade shows a statisticallysignificant difference (significance level, p = 0.001) with more ofthe younger group trusting these institutions than the seniorgroup.

On political and economic rights of women and ethnic groupsa mean score of 39.29 (79%) was recorded. There was astatistically significant difference by gender (significance level,p = 0.011) with girls having a higher score than boys. Regardingattitudes towards immigrants a mean score of 27.80 (70%) wasrecorded. Over half supported statements that were positivetowards immigrants. A statistically significant difference wasrecorded (significance level, p = 0.026) with more urban thanrural students selecting statements that were positive towardsimmigrants. The lowest mean score of 20.45 (58%) among allattitude measurement sections was recorded on attitudestowards political systems and political activities. Political issues,in many ways, have had the least support from students. Thereis a statistically significant difference by school grade (signifi-cance level, p = 0.027) with the juniors having a lower score thanthe seniors.

Table 6Student Likert scale scores on participation in citizenship issues.

Section Section content Total scores for

each section

A Participation in school life 35.00

B School curriculum 35.00

C Political action at school level 50.00

D Anticipated political action at adulthood 60.00

E Classroom climate for discussion 50.00

5.4. Participation in citizenship activities

The commission blames young people for a decline in their civicbehaviour which includes lack of participation in civic activities atthe school, community, national and international levels. Thisstudy investigated this claim by raising the following question:

� What are the levels of student participation in activities relatedto citizenship and citizenship education in their schools andcommunities?

Table 6 shows overall Likert scale scores on students’participation levels in selected key citizenship activities.

Over 60% strongly agreed with seven items that were supportiveof student participation at school level with 86% endorsing the viewthat allowing students to express their views at school could helpsolve school problems. Results also show a statistically significantdifference by school location (significance level, p = 0.035) withmore urban than rural students expressing their confidence aboutthe contribution of student involvement in school matters. Abouthalf of the students disagreed with the statement that at school theylearnt about the importance of voting in local and national elections.A statistically significant difference by school location (significancelevel, p = 0.031) indicated that more urban students agreed withstatements on this section than rural students. Urban students feltthey learnt some citizenship issues at school.

The lowest number of students supported items on involve-ment in activities related to politics. For example, more than half

Minimum score

recorded for students

Maximum score

recorded for students

Mean score (%)

for students

10.00 35.00 26.78 (77)

12.00 35.00 25.00 (71)

16.00 46.00 31.80 (64)

17.00 55.00 35.95 (60)

14.00 40.00 28.73 (58)

A.T. Sigauke / International Journal of Educational Development 32 (2012) 214–223220

never get involved in discussions on political issues about theirown country with their friends, family members or teachers. Thereare, however, an almost equal number of these who discuss andthose who do not discuss political issues of other countries withparents or other adult members of their families. As with nationalpolitics of their country a majority of students do not discusspolitics of other countries with their teachers. Over 80% often readstories or listen to news from the electronic media. This seems tosupport observations on another section above where over halfexpressed trust in the media. A statistically significant difference(significance level, p = 0.013) by school location was observed,with more rural than urban students being involved in politicalactivities, perhaps out of fear of being victimised if they do not doso. On anticipated involvement in political activities at adulthoodover half would probably take part in national elections atadulthood but not joining political parties. Slightly less than halfwould not consider being a candidate for a political office. Againover half would probably get involved in civic-related activitieswhile over 60% would certainly not engage in what authoritiesregard as illegal protest action. A statistically significant difference(significance level, p = 0.047) by school grade was observed withmore junior than senior students in support of this item.

Concerning the openness of the classroom discussion climateabout two thirds felt that they were often encouraged to freelyexpress their views in class. However, with regards to freedom toexpress opinions that differ from those of teachers slightly lessthan half never felt free to do so. An almost equal numbersometimes felt free to express opinions that differ with those oftheir teachers. Discussions of political issues in class are neverencouraged as indicated by over half of students. Examples ofpolitical issues include discussions of the extent to which localMembers of Parliament were addressing the needs of theirconstituencies, the extent to which elected individuals werebecoming more political powerful than had been expected, and theextent to which government was meeting the needs of ordinarypeople. Almost three quarters endorsed the statement thatteaching was teacher-centred and therefore did not allow freeclassroom discussion among students.

6. Discussions

Student views and test results from this study are in many wayscontradictory to many claims in the commission report aboutyoung people. This is in spite of periodic political tensions betweenthe ruling and opposition political parties which at the time of thestudy could have made it difficult for students to express their trueopinions. A more detailed interpretation and discussion of thesefindings follows.

6.1. Knowledge level on matters of citizenship

The test score for students in Zimbabwe is slightly below that ofstudents on the 1999 IEA study. However, unlike students on theIEA study, Zimbabwean students had not had citizenship educationas a statutory subject prior to the proposed programme. This resultshows that in spite of not having had any exposure to lessons oncitizenship issues these students have some basic knowledge ofcitizenship issues for which they were tested on this study. Theseresults in some ways seem to dispute comments in the commissionreport which claim that students did not know what citizenshipmeans. However, fewer students correctly answered items testingfor their skills of interpretation of information than those who didso for items testing for knowledge of citizenship content. Theseitems seem to be difficult to students. Items testing for skills ofinterpretation of information are a higher order categorycompared to recall items which tested for knowledge of citizenship

content (Bloom, 1956). This might explain this difference. Inaddition students learn some citizenship issues in their everydaylives out of the classroom environment which they simply neededto recall when these appeared on the test. Yet little is said in theofficial documents about developing interpretation skills instudents.

On a number of items there are differences between the twoclass grades with seniors doing better than juniors, most probablya result of differences in their educational levels though the agedifference could be a significant factor as well. This implies thatteachers need to take into account student age and academic leveldifferences when planning lessons on citizenship issues. Yet thecitizenship education programme proposed for Zimbabwe doesnot seem to address these factors.

The majority of students could distinguish between itemsdescribing democratic from non-democratic characteristics insociety. They were, however, divided on items concerning politicalactivities. This might have arisen from their experiences in thecountry where conflicts between political party supporters wereon the rise. This seems to agree with the 1999 IEA study findingswhere students were ambivalent of political party issues especiallywhere these are associated with conflict (Torney-Purta et al.,2001). In a study on student conception of democracy Husfeldt andNikolova (2003) explain that 14-year olds, similar to juniors in thisstudy, were too young to have concrete ideas about democracy.Concepts regarding democracy were more clearly understood byupper secondary school students than by 14-year olds. ‘‘Concreteconcepts of democracy become more evident when students getolder’’ (Husfeldt and Nikolova, 2003: 407). Findings in the presentstudy are a further challenge to the commission report. Studentscan distinguish between what might be regarded as good fromwhat is bad for democracy though, as noted in an earlierdiscussion, the meaning of democracy itself is also often asubjective definition.

Taking part in political discussions has the lowest number ofstudents who see this as an attribute of good citizenship. Studentsdo not see involvement in politics as an important aspect of goodcitizenship nor do they regard this as an important characteristic ofdemocracy. On the other hand almost all students regarded non-political activities as indicators of good citizenship. While thesestudents endorse non-political activities as indicators of goodcitizenship a large number were never involved in these activities.In a separate study (Sigauke, 2011b) teachers in Zimbabwe suggestthat school authorities fear that allowing students to work incommunities could lead to disciplinary problems. Like thecommission school authorities seem to see students as anti-social.

As noted above definitions of what is and what is not genuinecitizenship and democracy are controversial. There is not oneuniversal and objective understanding of citizenship and democ-racy which could objectively be defined as ‘good’ or ‘bad’.Citizenship and democracy are contested concepts and are oftensubjectively defined. This is why Osler and Starkey (2005: 9) pointout that citizenship is ‘‘a site of political struggle’’.

6.2. Attitudes towards citizenship issues

The commission says students have negative attitudes towardsgovernment institutions, women and ethnic group rights, migrantsand political systems.

In this study the majority of students expressed distrusttowards two institutions, local councils and political parties. Overthree quarters of students do not trust political parties. InZimbabwe local council candidates are put forward by politicalparties to represent party opinions on local issues. The lack ofconfidence in local councils expressed here is most likely linked tothe same lack of trust expressed towards political parties. First, the

A.T. Sigauke / International Journal of Educational Development 32 (2012) 214–223 221

violent conflict that sometimes takes place between political partymembers is sometimes viewed by residents as being incited bycouncillors representing these parties. Second, in Zimbabweresponses by councillors to requests from residents is generallyslow. These are likely reasons why students hold this attitudetowards councils and political parties.

There are more students supporting economic than thosesupporting political rights of women, possibly a reflection of thegeneral attitudes towards gender roles and the position of womenin politics. Politics in Zimbabwe is still male dominated. It maytherefore be that students see politics as a preserve for males andnot females. However, a large number of students see respect forwomen’s political and economic rights as indicators of democracy.Fewer women in the country are in formal employment. In times ofeconomic difficulties young people and women are more likely toexperience these difficulties than adult men do. It is perhaps forthese shared economic difficulties between young people andwomen that students hold this attitude.

Support for social and economic compared to political rights ofethnic groups is relatively high. Debate on ethnic group rights istopical in Zimbabwe especially regarding minority languages ineducation. More girls than boys are supportive of women’s andethnic group rights. This seems to agree with findings from otherstudies, for instance Hahn (1998) and the 1999 IEA study whichhave shown that males, compared to females, are less supportiveof women’s political and economic rights. Factors such asgovernment’s position on women’s rights, the number of womenin the country’s legislature and the visibility of women’s move-ments are important motivators for support for women’s rights. Inthe case of girls, this may be arising from a shared gender identity.Literature has also shown that, as with attitudes towards theirrights, females, compared to males, are more supportive ofimmigrant rights (Kerr, 2003).

Fewer students support the involvement of immigrants inpolitical issues of the country. It is not clear whether this is anotherexpression of their general disinterest in politics. While on thewhole the general picture is that students hold positive attitudestowards immigrants, Menezes (2003) explains that such attitudesmay vary depending on the level of contact between students andmigrants. In some cases, as was observed in a South African study,more contact may reinforce prejudice especially where immi-grants are regarded as competitors in job markets (Moodley andAdam, 2004). In other cases however, more contact may help indeveloping positive attitudes towards immigrants. Thus thepresence of immigrant students at schools or in communitiesmay help explain student attitudes towards these groups. Insituations where students are themselves immigrants or theirparents were immigrants, they are more likely to be positivetowards other immigrants because of a shared identity (Torney-Purta et al., 2006).

In this study urban students appear to be more supportive ofissues concerning immigrants than their rural counterpartsperhaps because, like in the case of ethnicity, the rural society isstill more homogeneous with fewer immigrants compared to theurban area. The effect of contact suggested above might also beuseful in explaining this difference. Urban areas in Zimbabweprovide greater opportunities than rural communities forcontact with immigrants. However, the image of rural areasas ethnically homogeneous is challenged by de Lima (2008) whonotes that, because of globalisation, for many societies this is nolonger the case.

6.3. Participation levels in school and community citizenship activities

The majority of students never or rarely discussed politicalissues with family members, teachers or colleagues. While some

students regard participation in political parties as good fordemocracy very few expressed interest in getting involved inpolitical activities, a situation described by Hess and Avery (2008)as the ‘‘development of silent citizenship’’ (p. 507). This may belinked to fears of political victimisation expressed by teachers inZimbabwe (Sigauke, 2011b). There is suspicion that talking aboutpolitics may result in victimisation. Yet citizenship educationshould also mean participation in local and national politicalmatters.

A large number of students are keen to follow news on themedia with the majority preferring listening to the radio andwatching television to reading newspapers. While exposure topolitical news may arouse political interest which, in turn, maylead to political participation, this does not seem to be the case for alarge number of students in this study. They do not regardfollowing political discussions in the media as important forcitizenship, possibly a result of experiences with the public mediain the country that tends to indirectly encourage political conflictthrough biased reporting. Results have shown that rural studentsare more involved in political activities than urban ones. Thisperhaps arises from the fact that conflict between differentpolitical parties is less marked in rural than it is in urban areas. Theruling party has for a long time been dominant in rural areas(Sithole, 2001; Kriger, 2005) and sometimes it is assumed thateveryone supports that party. However, young people’s participa-tion in political activities in these areas may also be out of the fearthat non-participation would lead to victimisation. Writing aboutthe 2000 election Sithole (2001) notes that the only persuasiveexplanation for the difference between rural and urban vote wasthat the level of intimidation and terror in the run – up to electionshad reached a level unprecedented since independence in 1980.This observation also applies to subsequent elections and istherefore a highly likely explanation for the behaviour of ruralstudents noted on this study.

There are more students who anticipated getting involved insocial/voluntary work than in political activities. Less than half ofstudents would wish to stand as a candidate for a local or cityoffice. These findings confirm observations in other sections of thisstudy concerning political issues. In a country where even peacefulcivic demonstrations may end up in clashes with the policestudents are not keen to be involved in peaceful demonstrations,let alone in unconventional forms of political protest. However,results show that junior students are more likely to be involved inpolitical activities in future than their senior counterparts.Regarding the age factor Hooghe and Stolle (2004) note thatattitudes towards political issues established at a younger age maychange at adulthood.

While for this study there was no significant difference bygender on participation in political matters, literature indicatesthat where a difference is observed it is often that more males thanfemales do so (Conway, 2000; Hooghe and Stolle, 2004). This isexplained in terms of female segregation in male dominatedpolitical institutions. Yet, on the other hand, as is often the case forZimbabwe, it is more females than males who vote at elections andwho get involved in social movement-related activities in manycountries.

Over three quarters of students are confident that theirinvolvement in school matters can help solve problems at theschool level, a position similar to views of 14-year olds in the IEAstudy (Torney-Purta et al., 2001). While a large number of studentsin the present study agree that they have learnt to cooperate atschool few think that electing student representatives would helpin making schools better places. This is perhaps linked to anotheritem where a majority indicated that they had never participatedin the choice of prefects at school possibly because prefects areviewed as working for teachers and the administration. Similarly

A.T. Sigauke / International Journal of Educational Development 32 (2012) 214–223222

observations in a South African study showed that the StudentRepresentative Council (SRC) was regarded by students as workingfor teachers and the administration (Moodley and Adam, 2004). InScotland, as for prefects in Zimbabwe, pupil councils in someschools are described as ‘‘tokenistic in nature’’ (Deuchar andMaitles in Bryce and Humes, 2008: 287) while student involve-ment in decision-making as part of citizenship education is markedby cynicism. Yet observations elsewhere, for example Hart et al.(2007), indicate that participation in civic activities at school levelat early adolescence can be a predictor of volunteering and votingat early adulthood. The expectation is that citizenship educationprogrammes would involve, directly or indirectly, studentparticipation in the decision making processes.

While a number of students indicated that they had learntcitizenship attributes from the school curriculum over halfdisagreed that they had learnt about the importance of voting innational and local government elections. This can possibly be onereason for the political apathy that is often observed among youngpeople at election times. It is also possible that teachers andstudents are unsure of their security about including politicalmatters in lessons. Yet encouraging political discussions in theclassroom can help in developing positive attitudes towards andparticipation in these activities (Hess and Avery, 2008). While anumber of students supported views on community involvementand environmental protection a majority of these same studentshas never participated in these activities both at school andcommunity levels. Much of what is endorsed as having been learntat the school level is not being translated into practice.

While student participation in classroom discussions is anessential feature of democratic schools (Trafford, 2008) a majorityof students in this study rarely felt free to bring up political issuesfor discussion in class. This is perhaps resulting from the fact thatteachers are themselves also not given the opportunity to allowstudents to do so. Furthermore, majority of students acknowledgethat teachers use teaching techniques that involve little selfexpression on the part of the student. Yet research shows thatstudents in classrooms that are supportive of political discussionstend to have a high level of political efficacy, interest and trust. Aclassroom in which teaching methods are teacher-centred does notencourage such discussions. Students should be encouraged toengage in critical discourse and to be unafraid to air conflict whenit arises (Trafford, 2008).

7. Conclusions

Students in Zimbabwe had not previously had any citizenshipeducation programme as a discrete subject. However, theirperformance on this test is high enough to dispute claims madein one key government document that young people in the countrydo not know what citizenship means, that they have little or scantyknowledge of citizenship issues. This study has also shown that alarge number of students are positively oriented towards socialmovement activities. However, findings also show that studentshold negative attitudes towards political matters. While anexplanation for this position could not be obtained directly fromstudents themselves this can be inferred from information fromteachers who consistently expressed fears that teaching aboutsome issues could lead to victimisation especially if these issueswere seen as politically sensitive and controversial.

For students in this study taking part in political activities doesnot constitute a measure of democracy or good citizenship. They donot regard discussions of political issues and following politicaldiscussions in the media as indicators of good citizenship. Theyhave a low trust in political institutions of the country. This isarising from their experiences of political conflicts in the country.Unless current political tensions change these findings have

implications for future levels of political action by these and otherstudents in the country indicating the beginning of future politicalapathy. As Print (2007) points out, political apathy arises wherecitizens are distrustful of politicians, where they are sceptical ofgovernment institutions, and where they are disillusioned abouthow democratic processes work.

Macro-social and political factors affect political values ofstudents and the extent to which they can participate in theseactivities. In Zimbabwe it appears that young people weredistrustful of the political environment, they were disillusionedwith the political system and with the economic developments inthe country at the time. This suggests that a citizenship educationprogramme introduced in a political atmosphere of mistrust mayneither change attitudes of learners, nor will it alter theirparticipation levels at their age and in future. At the same timeit is encouraging that they regard non-political community work asan indicator of democracy and good citizenship though they do notcurrently engage in these activities at the school and localcommunity levels.

Given the socio-political context in the country at the time it ispossible that unsubstantiated claims of anti-social behaviouramong young people could be useful justifications to impose areified citizenship education programme in schools, to manage andcontrol young people, to turn them away from being critical of, orquestioning the political, economic and social conditions aroundthem and government policies on these issues, to keep thempassive and ignorant of the sources of problems the country wasfacing. Students do not wish to be involved in unconventional orunlawful political activities, probably because they are do not wantto be seen as breaking the law. As noted above, citizenship andcitizenship education are controversial and contested concepts;there is not one objective understanding of citizenship. Goodcitizenship may, in fact, mean involvement in activities that maybe defined as unlawful or unconventional by authorities. Thuswhile non-involvement in these activities could be interpreted as asign of respect for the law this may also be arising from their fear ofthe political harassment that they see taking place around themwhich in fact is a transgression of citizens’ rights. On the other handinvolvement in these activities is not a guarantee that students donot break the law in other non-political areas. There may also beother reasons why students do not engage in unconventionalpolitical activities such as lack of interest in politic (politicalapathy) or that they may have interests in other issues which arenot politics. It is thus difficult to say whether or not non-involvement in these activities is a genuine respect for the law.Potter (2002) comments that young people are increasingly andunfairly the focus of suspicion and concern, they are viewed asviolent, criminal and with no interest in democracy but as peoplewho take drugs and prefer street protest to reasoned argument. Inreality, of course, nothing is as simple as this, it is easy to vilifyyoung people this way. For Zimbabwe and other countries insimilar contexts this study suggests that a genuine citizenshipeducation programme should be one that empowers young peopleso that they can freely participate in political, economic and socialmovement activities, a citizenship education which allows them toengage and challenge policies and events that are againstdemocratic values.

References

Abdi, A., Ellis, L., Shizha, E., 2005. Democratic development and the role of citizen-ship education in Sub-Saharan Africa with a case on Zambia. InternationalEducational Development 6 (4), 454–466.

Bertz, N., 2007. Educating the nation: race and nationalism in Tanzanian schools. In:Paul, N., Hammett, D., Sara, D. (Eds.), African Social Studies Series, vol. 16.Making Nations, Creating Strangers: States and Citizenship in Africa, BrillAcademic Publishers, Boston, pp. 161–180.

A.T. Sigauke / International Journal of Educational Development 32 (2012) 214–223 223

Bond, P., Manyanya, M., 2002. Zimbabwe’s Plunge: Exhausted Nationalism, Neo-liberalism and the Search for Social Justice. University of Natal Press, Pieter-maritzburg.

Bloom, B.S., 1956. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification ofEducational Goals: Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain. Longman, London.

Burns, N., 2002. Gender: public opinion and political action. In: Katznelson, I.,Milner, H. (Eds.), Political Science: The State of the Discipline. Norton, NewYork, pp. 462–487.

Chiroro, B., 2005. Persistent inequalities: women and electoral politics in theZimbabwe elections in 2005. Journal of African Elections 4 (2), 91–106.

Conway, M., 2000. Political Participation in the United States. CQ Press, Washington, DC.Davies, L., 2001. Citizenship education and contradictions. British Journal of Soci-

ology of Education 22 (2), 299–308.de Lima, P., 2008. ‘Ticking the ethnic box’: the experience of minority ethnic young

people in rural communities. Education in the North: A Scottish Journal ofEducation 15, 32–42.

Deuchar, R., Maitles, H., 2008. Education for citizenship. In: Bryce, T.G.K., Humes,W.M. (Eds.), Scottish Education: Beyond Devolution. 3rd edition. EdinburghUniversity Press, Edinburgh, pp. 285–292.

Divala, J.J., 2007. Malawi’s approach to democracy: implications for the teaching ofdemocratic citizenship. Citizenship Teaching and Learning 1 (1), 32–44.

Electoral Institute for the Sustainability of Democracy in Africa (EISA), 2000.Zimbabwe: the role of women in the 2000 Zimbabwe election. www.ei-sa.org.za/WEP/zimwomen1.htm (accessed 23/02/2011).

Enslin, P., Horsthemke, K., 2004. Can ubuntu provide a model for citizenshipeducation in African democracies? Comparative education 40 (4), 545–555.

Erdmann, G., Basedau, M., 2008. Party systems in Africa: problems of categorisingand explaining party systems. Journal of Contemporary African Studies 26 (3),241–258.

Fairclough, N., 1995. Critical Discourse Analysis. Longman, London.Fontein, J., 2009. Anticipating the tsunami: rumours, planning and the arbitrary

state in Zimbabwe. Africa 79 (3), 369–398.Hahn, C., 1998. Becoming Political: Comparative Perspectives on Citizenship Edu-

cation. State University of New York Press, Albany.Hammett, D., Staeheli, L.A., 2009. Citizenship education in South Africa. ESRC, UK.Hammett, D., 2010. Resistance, power and geopolitics in Zimbabwe. Area, no.

doi:101111/j.1475-4762.2010.00980.x.Hart, D., Donnelly, T.M., Youniss, J., Atkins, R., 2007. High school community service

as a predictor of adult voting and volunteering. American Educational ResearchJournal 44 (1), 197–219.

Hess, D., Avery, P.G., 2008. Discussion of controversial issues as a form and goal ofdemocratic education. In: Arthur, J., Davies, I., Hahn, C. (Eds.), The SAGEHandbook of Education for Citizenship and Democracy. Sage, Los Angeles/London, pp. 506–518.

Hooghe, M., Stolle, D., 2004. Good girls go to polling booths, bad boys go every-where: gender differences in anticipated political participation among Ameri-can fourteen-year-olds. Women and Politics 26 (3–4), 1–23.

Husfeldt, V., Nikolova, R., 2003. Students’ conception of democracy. EuropeanEducational Research Journal 2 (3), 396–409.

Kerr, D., 2003. Citizenship education in England: the making of a new subject.Online Journal of Social Science Education 2, 1–11.

Kriger, N., 2005. ZANU (PF) strategies in general elections, 1980–2000: discourseand coercion. African Affairs 104 (414), 1–34.

Lindberg, I.S., 2006. Opposition parties and democratisation in Sub-Saharan Africa.Journal of Contemporary African Studies 24 (1), 123–138.

Maiello, C., Oser, F., Biedermann, H., 2003. Civic knowledge, civic skills and civicengagement. European Educational Research Journal 2 (3), 384–395.

McEvoy, L., 2007. Beneath the rhetoric: policy approximation and citizenshipeducation in Northern Ireland. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice 2(2), 135–157.

McGlynn, C., 2004. Education for peace in integrated schools: a priority for NorthernIreland? Child Care in Practice 10 (2), 85–94.

Menezes, I., 2003. Participation experiences and civic concepts, attitudes andengagement: Implications for citizenship education projects. European Educa-tional Research Journal 2 (3), 430–445.

Mintrop, H., 2003. The old and new face of civic education: experts, teachers andstudent views. European Educational Research Journal 2 (3), 446–454.

Moodley, K.A., Adam, H., 2004. Citizenship education and political literacy in SouthAfrica. In: Banks, J.A. (Ed.), Diversity and Citizenship Education: Global Per-spectives. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

Murphy, T., 2006. The civic remit of educational practice in the Republic of Ireland: areview of the potential service learning. Education, Citizenship and SocialJustice 1, 203–210.

Nikolova, R., Lehmann, R., 2003. On the dimensionality of the cognitive test used inthe IEA civic education study: analysis and implications. European EducationalResearch Journal 2 (3), 370–383.

Okumu, W., 2005. Mapping the path for democratisation of Africa. News ForumAfrica: Press review 22 April 2005. www.newsfromafrica.org/newsfromafrica/articles/art_10235.html. (accessed 23/02/2011).

Osler, A., Starkey, H., 2005. Changing citizenship: democracy and inclusion ineducation. OUP, Maidenhead.

Peresuh, M., 1998. Post independence education in Zimbabwe: achievements,constraints and the way forward. Journal of practice in education for develop-ment 3 (3), 129–136.

Potter, J., 2002. Active Citizenship in Schools: A Good-practice Guide to Developinga Whole-school Policy. Kogan Page, London.

Presidential Commission, 1999. Report on the Zimbabwe Presidential Commissionof Inquiry into Education and Training. Harare. Government Printers.

Print, M., 2007. Citizenship education and youth participation in democracy. BritishJournal of Educational Studies 55 (3), 325–345.

Raftopoulos, B., 2002. Briefing: Zimbabwe’s 2002 presidential elections. AfricanAffairs 101, 413–426.

Raftopoulos, B., 2007a. Shifting grounds in Zimbabwe citizenship and farmworkers in the new politics of land.In: Making Nations, Creating Strangers:States and Citizenship in Africa. In: Paul, N., Hammett, D., Sara, D. (Eds.),African Social Studies Series, vol. 16. Brill Academic Publishers, Boston, pp.105–119.

Raftopoulos, B., 2007b. Nation, race and history in Zimbabwean politics.In: MakingNations, Creating Strangers: States and Citizenship in Africa. In: Paul, N.,Hammett, D.,Sara, D. (Eds.), African Social Studies Series, vol. 16. Brill AcademicPublishers, Boston, pp. 181–194.

Roldao, M., 2003. Civic education: what we are getting from research. EuropeanEducational Research Journal 2 (3), 455–460.

Schoeman, S., 2006. A blueprint for democratic citizenship education in SouthAfrican public schools: African teachers’ perceptions of good citizenship. SouthAfrican Journal of Education 26 (1), 129–142.

Schulz, W., Sibberns, H. (Eds.) 2004. IEA Civic Education Study Technical Report. IEA,Amsterdam.

Sigauke, A.T., 2011a. Citizenship and citizenship education: a critical discourseanalysis of the Zimbabwe Presidential Commission Report. Journal of Educa-tion, Citizenship and Social Justice. doi:10.1177/1746197910397913.

Sigauke, A.T., 2011b. Political ideas can only be discussed if they are in thesyllabus; otherwise a political discussion is not necessary: teachers’ views oncitizenship education in Zimbabwe. Citizenship Teaching and LearningJournal. Issue 6.3.

Sithole, M., 2001. Fighting authoritarianism in Zimbabwe. Journal of Democracy 12(1), 160–169.

Staeheli, L.A., Hammett, D., 2010. Educating the new national citizen: education,political subjectivity and divided societies. Citizenship Studies 14 (6), 667–680.

Suarez, D.F., 2008. Rewriting citizenship? Civic education in Costa Rica andArgentina. Comparative Education 44 (4), 485–503.

Torney-Purta, J., Barber, C.H., Wilkenfeld, B., 2006. Latino adolescents’ civic devel-opment in the United States: research results from the IEA civic educationstudy. Journal of Youth Adolescence 36, 111–125.

Torney-Purta, J., Richardson, W.K. 2002. Sources of civic behaviour and knowledge:School-related experiences and organisational membership among adolescentsin a 28-country comparative study. Paper prepared for workshop: Citizenshipon trial: the interdisciplinary perspectives on political socialisation of adoles-cents. June 2002, McGill University.

Torney-Purta, J., Lehmann, R., Oswald, H., Schultz, W., 2001. Citizenship andEducation in Twenty-Eight Countries: Civic Knowledge and Engagement atAge Fourteen. IEA, Amsterdam.

Trafford, B., 2008. Democratic schools: towards a definition. In: Arthur, J., Davies, I.,Hahn, C. (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Education for Citizenship and Democra-cy. SAGE, Los Angeles and London, pp. 410–423.

Tshabangu, I.P., 2006. Student participation and responsible citizenship in a non-polyarchy: an evaluation of challenges facing Zimbabwe’s schools. Internation-al Education Journal 7 (1), 56–65.

Uslaner, E., 2002. The Moral Education of Trust. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge.

Yoon, Y.M., 2011. More women in the Tanzanian legislature: do numbers matter?Journal of Contemporary African Studies 29 (1), 83–98.

Zeilig, L., 2008. Student politics and activism in Zimbabwe: the frustrated transition.Journal of Asian and African Studies 43 (2), 215–237.

Zvobgo, R.J., 1996. Transforming education: the Zimbabwean experience. CollegePress, Harare.