1. education

Best Practices Manual
on Democracy Education
Best Practices Manual
on Democracy Education
Foreword
Whether in South Africa, Chile, Poland, Korea, or Tunisia, the struggle to establish democracy has been
a noble and heroic one, fraught with great sacrifice. We have come to realize that the great democratic
transformations that have swept the globe, if they are to endure and fulfill the aspirations of a people,
require more than the ouster of a dictator and more even than free and fair elections. If democracy is truly
to take root, an extensive institutional framework and, perhaps more importantly, the active participation
of a population are needed if a government of the people — democracy — is to survive and thrive. That
participation can only be generated if the people of the new democracy are educated, informed, and
encouraged to exercise their rights. Our premise is that education for democracy is the glue that sustains
and holds a democratic system together.
This Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education is the culmination of more than a decade during
which the Council for a Community of Democracies (CCD) has made democracy education a priority for
the Community of Democracies (CD) and the democracy community at large. From the three Pocantico
Conferences, which resulted in the creation of the Global Strategic Plan for Democracy Education, the
adoption of democracy education as the top priority of the Mongolian Chairmanship of the CD, and the
Charlottesville Declaration, to the United Nations resolution on education for democracy, CCD’s efforts
have brought democracy education to the forefront for policymakers. This manual brings together writings
from experts and practitioners to provide a guide for those educators, policymakers, and others interested
in democracy education.
With the generous support of the United Nations Democracy Fund (UNDEF), this project includes case
studies from around the world that provide examples of successful and imaginative democracy education
programs at every level. Highlighting cases from nondemocratic and transitioning countries, this manual
shows that the work to build an effective citizenry takes many forms and has already begun. It is never,
however, completed, even in the cases of the most advanced democracies.
We wish especially to acknowledge the guidance of our principle author, David McQuoid-Mason, whose
work on democracy education in South Africa contributed to the struggle for freedom in that country. This
work also owes a debt to Matthew Hiebert of Canada and to those who have provided us with case studies.
Also critical to this project have been Christopher Brandt and Rebecca Aaberg of CCD, who have worked
tirelessly on countless aspects of the project.
Robert R. LaGamma, President
Council for a Community of Democracies
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
iii
A Decade Promoting Democratic
Consolidation through Education
for Democracy
The Council for a Community of Democracies
(CCD) has prioritized democracy education since
its inception in 2000 through policy advocacy;
partnerships among governments, civil society,
and academia; and curriculum ideas. From 2003
to 2008, CCD organized a series of consultations with international experts on education,
representatives of Ministries of Education, and
civil society leaders to develop the Global Strategic
Plan for Democracy Education, which presents a
framework for expanding democracy education at
the international, national, and local levels. The
Pocantico Conferences provided a strong foundation from which CCD has built its democracy
education initiative.
Democracy education was announced as the priority theme of the Mongolian Chairmanship of the
Community of Democracies from 2011–13. This
decision came after years of advocacy for democracy
education by CCD, which has consistently emphasized democracy education as an essential element
of successful long-term consolidation of democratic
transition. CCD was asked by the Mongolian Chair
to be an active participant in its emphasis on democracy education, which included its engagement
in the Working Group on Democracy Education
co-chaired by Mongolia and Poland and promoting
the United Nations General Assembly resolution on
education for democracy passed in November 2012.
CCD also worked with the Mongolian government
to develop the agenda for the May 2012 Ulaanbaatar
International Seminar on Education for Democracy.
iv
Operating under a grant from the United Nations
Democracy Fund, CCD has continued its efforts to
promote democracy education as a crucial component of democratic governance. In October 2012,
CCD brought experts and practitioners together
for a panel discussion on democracy education
for the biennial World Movement for Democracy
conference in Lima, Peru. In March 2013, CCD
organized “Creating a Culture of Democracy
through Education: A Strategy for Policymakers,”
a conference held in Charlottesville, Virginia. The
academics, practitioners, and policymakers who
gathered at the Charlottesville Conference produced the Charlottesville Declaration, which provides recommendations for implementing democracy education. The Declaration was successfully adopted by the Community of Democracies
during the Ulaanbaatar CD Ministerial conference
in April. CCD participated in the Ulaanbaatar
Ministerial, chairing a civil society panel on
democracy education and contributing to the
Ministerial panel on the subject. The publication
of this Manual will provide a practical overview of
innovative techniques and ideas to build citizens’
knowledge of democracy and the role that they
play within it.
To learn more about CCD and our work on
democracy education, please visit our website:
www.ccd21.org.
To read the Charlottesville Declaration, please visit:
www.ccd21.org/activities/education/charlottesville_
conference/Charlottesville_Report.pdf
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Table of Contents
Foreword – CCD President Robert LaGamma
iii
A Decade Promoting Democratic Consolidation
through Education for Democracy iv
Part I
Chapter One - David McQuoid-Mason1
Chapter Two - Matthew Hiebert37
Part II: Case Studies
Introduction – David McQuoid-Mason53
Bosnia and Herzegovina – Rolf Gollob54
Burundi – Marie-Louise Ström58
Colombia – Susana Restrepo64
Greece – Angeliki Aroni68
Ghana – Harrison Belley74
Hungary – Atilla Farkas78
Kenya – Carla Chianese82
Lebanon – Hoda El Khatib Chalak88
Mongolia – Damba Ganbat
Nepal – Mukti Rijal96
Philippines – Jules Maaten
Russia – Arkady Gutnikov104
Senegal – Boubacar Tall109
Slovenia – Dejan Kokol112
South Sudan – Nancy Flowers115
Thailand (Dream Country) – Rainer Adam,
92
100
Pimrapaat Dusadeeisariyakul, and Ben Fourniotis
120
Thailand (SIM Democracy) – Rainer Adam,
Pimrapaat Dusadeeisariyakul, and Ben Fourniotis
125
United Kingdom – Ted Huddlestone128
United States – Lee Arbetman131
United States – Lee Arbetman and Xinia Bermudez135
Acronym Guide138
Organizations Working on Democracy Education139
UN Resolution on Education for Democracy146
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
v
vi
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
PART I:
Chapter One: Introduction to
Democracy Education — by David McQuoid-Mason
designed to be a practical teaching and learning tool
for democracy educators — particularly in developing countries. For this reason, it will not deal with
academic arguments about whether democracy education should be “about” or “for” democracy. Many
of the lessons in the Manual are aimed at both —
particularly those dealing with citizen participation
in democratic societies. Therefore, for the purposes
of the Manual, the term “democracy education”
includes both education “about” democracy and
education “for” democracy.
Learning outcomes:
At the end of this chapter you will be able to:
1. Explain the purpose of the Best Practices on
Democracy Education and the rationale for
using interactive teaching and learning methods when conducting democracy education.
2. Demonstrate how to construct lesson plans
for a democracy education lesson and how
to use a variety of interactive teaching and
learning methods when conducting democracy education.
3. Appreciate the value of using interactive
teaching and learning methods when conducting democracy education.
In order to make the Manual easily accessible to
democracy educators in both the formal and informal sectors — particularly in developing countries
and those undergoing transitions to democracy —
technical, educational, and other jargon has been
avoided as far as possible. However, when suggesting how lesson plans for democracy education
should be designed, the pedagogical concepts of
knowledge, skills, and values have been retained
and will be explained.
Contents
1.1Introduction to the Best Practices
Manual on Democracy Education
1.2USAID Survey on Effective
Civic Education
1.3Democracy education curricula
1.4Rationale for using interactive
teaching methods
1.6Interactive methods of
democracy education
The Manual draws on best practices regarding
democracy education lessons from a number of
countries, many of which have fairly recently undergone the transition to democracy and are members
of the Community of Democracies.1 Where countries have given actual examples of democracy
lessons using interactive teaching and learning
1.7Conclusion
1
1.5
Lesson plans for an effective
democracy education program
1.1Introduction to the Best
Practices Manual on
Democracy Education
This Best Practices on Democracy Education
is
The Community of Democracies (CD) is an intergovernmental
organization that consists of a 24-member Governing Council
(GC), an Executive Committee (EC), and a Permanent Secretariat
(PSCD). The GC is responsible for issuing invitations to governments either to participate in or to observe the biennial ministerial
conference. For more information on the CD, please visit the
PSCD website: www.community-democracies.org.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
1
techniques, these have been incorporated under the
relevant methods referred to in Part I of the Manual.
Where no examples for a particular teaching and
learning technique have been submitted from other
countries, the editor has either incorporated lessons
from the very successful South African Democracy
for All and Street Law learner and educator manuals
or created a new relevant example. The Democracy
for All manuals were developed during the country’s
transition to democracy by Street Law South Africa
and Street Law, Inc. in the United States and have
been translated into a number of languages, including Arabic, French, Mongolian, and Romanian.
measure how adult and school-based civic education programs impacted the democratic behavior
and attitudes of participants in the programs.
USAID’s Center for Democracy and Governance
(now the Office of Democracy, Human Rights, and
Governance) managed the study, which looked at
adult and school-based civic education programs in
the Dominican Republic, Poland, and South Africa
and used both quantitative and qualitative methods
to obtain the results. The result was the first comprehensive study of the impact of civic and democracy education programs on transitional societies.
1.2.1 Results of the Study
Part II gives descriptions of democracy education in
a number of countries that have undergone or are
undergoing the transition to democracy. Although a
standard format was suggested to the authors from
the different countries, some have engaged in their
own approach, and these have been retained to
reflect the socio-political situations in the countries
concerned.
While in many countries the term “civic education”
is preferred to “democracy education,” particularly
in the formal school system, in many transitional
countries the term “democracy education” is used,
particularly for informal educational programs. For
the purposes of this Manual, the terms are used
interchangeably.
1.2 USAID Survey on Effective
Civic Education
In the early 1990s, when a number of countries were undergoing transitions to democracy, the United States Agency for International
Development (USAID) spent almost $30 million
a year on civic and democracy education and
by the end of the decade had spent about $232
million. USAID commissioned a major study to
2
The results of the study indicated that civic education
programs for adults can have a significant, positive
impact on certain key aspects of democratic behavior
and attitudes. Such education seemed to contribute
to decidedly greater political participation by those
exposed to the program, particularly at the local level.
The study showed that civic education can moderately
but significantly improve the participants’ knowledge
about their political systems and democratic institutions and led to a “greater sense of political efficacy.”
However, the study also showed that civic education
programs appear to have little effect on changing
democratic values, such as political tolerance, and
even tended to have a negative impact on the trust
participants had in political institutions. It also found
that men tended to benefit more from civic education
than women, and while women made some gains, the
programs tended to reinforce gender disparities in the
role that women play in politics.
There was little difference between the findings for
school-based civic education programs and those for
adult programs, although the impact of civics training “was generally weaker and more inconsistent for
participants than for adults.” Understandably, the
school and family environments were powerful forces affecting the behavior and attitude of participants
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
and must be taken into account in designing civic
education programs for participants. The major
finding of the study that applied to both adult and
school-based programs was that the design of the
curriculum and the quality of instruction are essential for the success of civic education programs.
1.2.2 Effective Civic
Education Programs
The study found that in addition to curriculum
design and quality of instruction, the following
were indicators of effective programs:
(a) Frequent sessions – one or two sessions
had little or no impact, but three or more
seemed to lead to a significant impact.
(b) Participatory teaching methods – such as
“breakout groups, dramatizations, roleplays, problem solving activities, simulations, and mock political or judicial activities” because they have a much better
impact than passive teaching methods such
as lectures or the distribution of materials.
(c) Knowledgeable and inspiring teachers –
“teachers who fail to engage their participants have little success in transmitting
information about democratic knowledge,
values, or ways to participate effectively in
the democratic political process.”
1.2.3 Lessons Learned for Designing
more Effective Civic Education Programs
The following factors were found to be important when designing an effective civic education
program — some of which have been previously
mentioned:
(a) Identify and address obstacles to frequent
participation – design the civic education
program to deal with them.
(b) Use as many participatory methods as possible – such as “role-plays,
dramatizations, small group exercises, and
group discussions” all of which are far more
effective than passive methods to teach
about democratic practices and values.
(c) Build opportunities for political participation – through NGOs or meetings with
local government officials to achieve direct
political engagement.
(d) Focus on issues that are relevant to people’s
daily lives – identify the daily concerns
of participants and show how democracy
deals with them.
(e) Train the trainers – trainers should be able
to use a range of participatory teaching
methods and be able to adapt their methods and the content of the curriculum to
the immediate needs of participants.
(f) T
arget groups – people with extensive social
networks seem to benefit more from civic
education than people who do not belong
to social, economic, or political groups —
and it is suggested that “group membership may be a useful screening device for
recruiting participants into civic education
programs.”
(g) Deal with gender issues – women, particularly in the developing world, often face
greater obstacles (e.g. a lack of resources
and cultural barriers) than men and may
need support programs in addition to civic
education.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
3
(h) Avoid inflating expectations – civic education
appears to reduce participants’ trust in institutions, so the standards about what democracies can deliver should not be set so high
that they create unrealistic expectations — it
may be better to “focus on specific shortterm goals, in addition to broader issues of
political or constitutional reform.”
cation curriculum for that country’s first
democratic elections.
1.3.1USAID Democracy Education
Survey Findings
The USAID Democracy Education Survey found that for
effective democracy education programs, the following
should be included in civic education curricula:
(a) A focus on issues relevant to the everyday
lives of participants.
(i) Involve parents, teachers, and school administrators in school-based programs – schools
and family beliefs and practices have a
powerful influence on the lives of children
and young adults.
(b) A consideration of gender issues — particularly the role of women in democratic
societies.
1.3 Democracy Education
Curricula
(c) An indication that democracy is not the
panacea for all the ills in society — by not
setting the expectations of democracy so
high that they become unrealistic.
Numerous suggestions have been made as to what
should be included in democracy education curricula, but it is beyond the scope of this Manual to
debate these. Instead, reference will be made to the
following suggested frameworks and practical steps
taken to develop curricula that have worked in practice — each of which teaches a different lesson:
(a) The findings of the USAID Democracy
Education Survey concerning what worked
and did not work for democracy education in the Dominican Republic, Poland,
and South Africa during their transitional
stages.
(b) Some of the suggestions in the Education for
Democracy Curriculum Framework presented by Mongolia during its Chairmanship of
the Community of Democracies.
(d) Opportunities for direct engagement in
political activities involving meetings with
government officials and NGOs.
(e) The involvement of parents, teachers, and
school administrators in democracy education programs in schools.
1.3.2The Education for Democracy
Framework Recommendations
The Education for Democracy Framework recommended that the following holistic knowledge,
skills, and values outcomes should be included in
education for democracy curricula:
(c) The South African Street Law experience
when engaging with NGOs and communities to develop a Democracy for All edu-
4
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
(a) Knowledge about political systems and
government; culture and society; rights and
responsibilities; important social, political,
economic, environmental, international,
and other issues; and current affairs.
(b) Skills involving critical thinking; systems
thinking (e.g. understanding the complexities of democracy and that it can be messy);
critical literacy and communication (e.g.
being able to detect bias and distortion in
the media); how to work through ambiguity; and conflict resolution.
(c) Values that reflect autonomy; justice and
care (i.e. fairness and the need for empathy
and understanding); integrity; reciprocity
(i.e. the need to balance our individual interests with the interests of others); local and
global citizenship; reasonableness; mutual
civic respect (i.e. not just tolerating others
views but also respecting them); and civic
engagement.
The Education for Democracy Framework also recommends that school-level education for democracy outcomes should involve developing a sense of
connectedness amongst students, teachers, administrators, parents and society; democratically engaged
teachers; school and community partnerships;
parental and community involvement in schools;
and democratic school governance. Some of these
recommendations are similar to the findings of the
USAID Survey regarding school programs.
The Education for Democracy Framework recommends the following content and themes in education for democracy programs:
(e) the global context of democracy.
In addition, it recommends that relevant themes
should include the environment; human rights;
gender; minorities, marginalization and discrimination; poverty; war, conflict and violence; globalization; migration and immigration; and corruption
and abuse of power.
1.3.3 The South African
Street Law Experience
In 1990 after the release of Nelson Mandela, Street
Law South Africa (Street Law SA), with assistance
from Street Law, Inc. produced learner’s and instructor’s manuals, entitled Human Rights for All (1990),
designed to introduce South Africans of all races
to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Subsequently, in 1993 once it became clear that
South Africa was about to get a new democratic constitution, Street Law SA and Street Law, Inc. produced
similar learner’s and instructor’s manuals, entitled
Democracy for All (1994), to be used in a nationwide Democracy for All program funded by USAID.
The program was introduced to support the efforts of
NGOs involved in voter education for the country’s
first democratic election on April 27, 1994.
The manner in which the Democracy for All curriculum was constructed after extensive consultations
with, and field-testing in, civil society provides a
useful lesson for countries transitioning to democracy. The steps followed in the consultations and for
the development of the curriculum were as follows:
(a) what democracy is
(b) how democracy works
(c) arguments for and against democracy
(d) cultivating and enhancing democracy
(a) S treet Law SA called a meeting of 26 NGOs
conducting voter education in KwaZuluNatal and offered to work with them to
develop a curriculum on democracy.
(b) T
he NGOs mentioned that they would
cooperate with the Democracy for All project
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
5
but were too involved in voter education to
become involved in writing the materials;
they were happy for Street Law SA to develop a curriculum in workshops and to fieldtest any materials developed.
(i) The completed drafts were edited, returned
to the authors for amendments, and then
returned to the editor who sent them out to
the 26 NGOs and the 21 Street Law coordinators throughout the country for two
months of field-testing.
(c) S treet Law SA approached Street Law, Inc.
for technical assistance and put together
a rainbow coalition of South African and
Street Law, Inc. authors with Street Law SA
as the project leader.
(j) A
fter the field-testing period, expired representatives of the 26 NGOs and the 21 Street Law
coordinators attended a feed-back workshop
with the authors to discuss the materials.
(d) T
he 26 NGOs were invited to a workshop
where they were asked to brainstorm a
practical and relevant curriculum for a
democracy education program in South
Africa that would supplement their voter
education efforts.
(k) A
t the workshop, the materials were discussed chapter-by-chapter and page-bypage and the comments recorded by the
authors and the editor.
(l) A
t the end of the workshop, the authors were
requested to incorporate the comments into
their chapters and to return the amended text
to the editor within one month.
(e) D
uring the workshop the suggestions of
the participants were reduced to six broad
topics that would form the basis of the six
chapters of the manual.
(m) T
he editor incorporated the completed
chapters into the consolidated text and
consulted with a team of cartoonists to
illustrate the different chapters with a
request that they send their drawings to
the editor within one month.
(f) T
he suggested topics were: (i) what democracy is; (ii) how government works in a
democracy; (iii) checking the abuse of
power; (iv) human rights and democracy;
(v) elections; and (vi) citizen participation.
(n) D
raft cartoons were submitted and
approved by the editor and finalized within two weeks.
(g) T
he authors were allocated different chapters and required to produce their chapter
outlines to report back at a meeting with
the NGOs in a month’s time.
(h) A
t the follow-up meeting, the outlines
were presented, critiqued, and refined and
the authors instructed to complete their
chapters within three months and to submit them to the Street Law SA editor.
6
(o) T
he complete illustrated Democracy for All
Manual was sent to the printers and printed within six weeks.
The Democracy for All approach shows how a curriculum and published materials can be developed
in less than a year, despite engaging in widespread
consultation.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
1.4Rationale for Using
Interactive Teaching Methods
As mentioned in the USAID Survey, participatory,
interactive teaching and learning methods should
be used in civic and democracy education, rather
than the traditional passive lecture method. That
this is the most effective way of teaching and
learning has been confirmed in the research that is
summarized in the so-called “learning pyramid.”
The origins of the “learning pyramid” are obscure,
but the “learning pyramid” provides a valuable tool
for demonstrating that interactive learning is one
of the most effective ways for people to learn.
The “learning pyramid” indicates that the rate of
memory retention increases as more earner-centered
interactive teaching methods are used. For example,
if lectures are used, learners remember 5 percent.
If learners read for themselves, they remember 10
percent. If audio-visual methods are used (e.g. an
LEARNING PYRAMID
WHAT WE REMEMBER
LECTURES
READING
DEMONSTRATIONS
SMALL GROUP DISCUSSIONS
DEMONSTRATION & PRACTICE
TEACH OTHERS
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
7
overhead projector or PowerPoint), learners remember 20 percent. If learners see a demonstration, they
will remember 30 percent. If they discuss issues in
small groups, they will remember 50 percent. If they
practice by doing, they will remember 75 percent.
And finally, if the learners teach others or immediately use the information they have been given, they
will remember 90 percent.
As mentioned in the USAID Survey, it is essential for
trainers to be trained in a wide variety of interactive
teaching and learning methods if civic and democracy education programs are going to be effective. To
give effect to this suggestion, a selection of participatory teaching methods have been compiled — where
appropriate with examples from different countries.
1.5 Lesson Plans for an Effective
Democracy Education Program
This section defines learning outcomes and then
describes the requirement for an effective lesson.
1.5.1 Learning Outcomes: Knowledge,
Skills, and Values
Learning outcomes describe the material learners
will have learned by the end of the lesson. When
developing a lesson plan, democracy educators
should bear in mind that the ideal lesson should
include knowledge, skills, and values.
Knowledge outcomes refer to what learners will be
able to explain by the end of the lesson about the
relevant democracy law or principles, the skills and/
or the values being taught (e.g. “At the end of the
lesson learners will be able to explain …”).
Skills outcomes refer to what learners will be able to
do by the end of the lesson (e.g. “At the end of this
lesson learners will be able to conduct …”).
8
Values outcomes refer to what learners will appreciate by the end of the lesson (e.g. “At the end of
this lesson students will appreciate the importance
of …”).
The learning outcomes regarding the knowledge,
skills, and values to be learned should be explained
to the students at the beginning of each lesson so they
know what to expect. The inclusion of the expected
outcomes in the lesson plans ensures that the educator has the necessary guidelines as to what he or
she is trying to achieve in the lesson. Each activity
during a lesson should be directly linked to achieving the particular outcomes for the lesson. Thus, the
outcomes enable the educators to check whether or
not they have achieved the objectives of their lessons.
1.5.2 Effective Lessons
Democracy educators should not rely on the traditional lecture approach to teaching because it is the
least effective method of imparting knowledge to
students — see 1.4 above.
In order to use interactive teaching methods, it is
necessary to consider the elements of an effective
lesson and what should be included in a lesson plan
that uses interactive strategies.
As has been pointed out, an effective lesson is not
merely a lecture. An effective lesson goes beyond
using the lecture technique in order to stimulate
cognitive learning by learners. It is recommended
that for an effective lesson, the following elements
should be included:
1. Substance: relevant aspects of democracy or a
bill of rights, the relevant law or practice.
2. Policy considerations: why the bill of rights
was introduced, how it works in practice, etc.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
3. Conflicting values: a lesson will be more lively and motivating if learners are exposed to different
competing values (e.g. the need for a multi-party
political environment weighed against the dangers
of undemocratic political parties being allowed to
stand for election).
4. An interactive teaching strategy: see 1.6
below.
5. Practical advice (when possible): educators need to know what can be done in practice if
their democratic rights are infringed.
1.5.3 Structure of Lesson Plans
Unlike lectures, where time management is relatively easy, interactive learning methods require very
careful time management.
The following outline for lesson plans involving
interactive learning methods can be used:
allocate questions (5 minutes).
4.3 S mall group discussions of questions
(10 minutes).
4.4 R
eport back from small groups (20
minutes).
4.5 G
eneral discussion and checking questions (10 minutes).
Total: 50 minutes
Step 5: Set out the resources needed for the
lesson (e.g. case study handouts, flip chart,
overhead projector, PowerPoint projector, etc.).
Step 6: Make a list of questions for the concluding session to check that the outcomes for
the lesson have been achieved.
1.5.3.1 Example of a General Lesson Plan
The following is an example a case study and general lesson plan for how to conduct the lesson.
Step 1: Set out the topic of the lesson.
Step 2: Set out the learning outcomes for the
lesson — state what learners will be able to do
at the end of the lesson in respect of knowledge, skills and values.
Step 3: Set out the content of the lesson in
respect of the areas that have to be covered in
respect of knowledge, skills and values (i.e.
what has to be taught in respect of each).
Step 4: Set out the interactive strategies that
will be used together with their time frames in
respect of each outcome, for example:
Debate: Should privately owned mines in a country
be nationalized?
Learners should be divided into opposing teams to
debate the above topic.
Lesson Plan: Debate: Should privately owned
mines in a country be nationalized?
1. Topic: Nationalization of mines
2. Outcomes: At the end of this lesson you will
be able to:
4.1 Focuser: brainstorm (5 minutes).
4.2 Divide learners into small groups and
2.1 Explain the arguments for and against the
nationalization of mines.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
9
2.3 Appreciate that in a democracy there are
conflicting views about the ownership of property when it comes to mineral wealth.
ly reply to their opponents within the
designated time frames of 1 minute for
each side (2 minutes).
3. Procedure:
3.8 Repeat the steps 3.5-3.7 and allow two
other groups to argue in favor and against
nationalization of the mines (12 minutes).
3.1 Focuser: Ask learners what is meant by
“nationalization” and what it involves
(5 minutes).
3.8 A
sk all the participants to vote on which
side presented the best arguments and
deserved to win the debate (2 minutes)
3.2 Allocate the debate topic to two large
groups of participants and choose which
groups will argue for and against the
proposition (1 minute).
3.9 C
onclude and ask checking questions
(2 minutes)
3.3 Subdivide the large groups into small
groups of not more than five persons
each (1 minute).
Total: 50 minutes.
4. Resources: Hand-out on section in Bill of
Rights dealing with property rights.
3.4 Get the small groups to prepare their
arguments and to choose two debaters
to present their arguments (one, the
main debater, to present the group’s
arguments, and the other, a replying
debater, to reply to the opposing group’s
arguments) (15 minutes).
5. Checking questions: Question and answer
on nationalization of mines, for example:
5.1 What does nationalization mean?
5.2 Why do bills of rights in democratic countries provide for private ownership of land?
3.5 Allow the main debater from one small
group that prepared arguments in favor
of the proposition to present their arguments first within the designated time
frame (5 minutes).
3.6 Allow the main debater from another
small group that prepared arguments
against the proposition to present their
arguments within the designated time
frame (5 minutes).
3.7 Allow the replying debaters who are in
favor or against the proposition to brief-
5.3 W
hat are the arguments in favor of
nationalizing the mines?
5.4 W
hat are the arguments against nationalizing the mines?
1.6 Interactive Methods of
Democracy Education
The following interactive teaching methods will be
discussed: (i) brainstorming, (ii) ranking exercises,
(iii) small group discussions, (iv) triads, (v) case
studies, (vi) role-plays, (vii) question and answer,
10 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
(viii) simulations, (ix) debates, (x) games, (xi)
hypothetical problems, (xii) moots, (xiii) mock
trials, (xiv) open-ended stimulus, (xv) snow ball,
(xvi) opinion polls, (xvii) participant presentations,
(xviii) storytelling, (xix) taking a stand, (xx) thinking on your feet – PRES formula, (xxi) problem
solving – FIRAC formula, (xxii) values clarification,
(xxiii) fishbowl, (xxiv) jigsaw, (xxv) “each one,
teach one,” (xxvi) visual aids, (xxvii) the use of
experts, (xxviii) field trips, (xxix) direct participation, and (xxx) “dream country.”
The discussion of each teaching and learning method includes a brief explanation of the method and
how it is used.
chart without judging whether they are
right or wrong, good or bad.
Step 3: Clarify but do not judge answers as and
when required.
Step 4: Go through the brainstormed list,
acknowledging the contribution by
each participant.
Step 5: R
elate the brainstormed list of ideas or
solutions to the purpose of the lesson
and if necessary move on to the next
part of the lesson, which may include
ranking the items in the brainstormed
list — see 1.6.2 below.
1.6.1 Brainstorming
Brainstorming is a means of encouraging a free flow
of ideas from participants. It is an important learning technique because it encourages participants to
generate creative ideas without fear of criticism.
Example: Listing the signposts of democracy
During brainstorming, the trainer invites participants to think of as many different ideas as possible
and records all the suggestions on a blackboard or
flip chart, even if some of them might appear to
be incorrect. If the answers seem to indicate that
the question is not clear, it should be rephrased.
Instructors should postpone any criticism of the
suggestions made until all the ideas have been
written down. Thereafter, the suggestions may be
criticized and if necessary ranked in order of priority — see 1.6.2 below.
3. Each signpost is then explained and discussed
with the educator leading the discussion.
The instructor should use the following steps when
conducting a brainstorming exercise:
Step 1: I nvite participants to think of as many
different ideas or solutions as they can.
Step 2: Record all answers on a board or flip-
1. T he educator asks the learners: What are the
signposts of democracy?
2. T he educator lists all the answers on a blackboard or flipchart.
1.6.2 Ranking Exercises
Ranking exercises involve making choices between
competing alternatives. The trainer can either use a
list brainstormed and developed by the participants
or give the participants a list of items to rank, for
example, 5 to 10 different items. Participants should
then be required to rank the items from 1 to 5 or 1
to 10, with 1 being the most important and 5 or 10
the least. Participants can be asked to: (a) justify
their ranking, (b) listen to people who disagree, and
(c) re-evaluate their ranking in the light of views of
the other participants.
When conducting a ranking exercise, the instructor
should do the following:
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
11
Step 1: Give the participants a list of competing
alternatives or use a brainstormed list
— see 1.6.1 above.
Step 7: T
he process is repeated group by group
until all the signposts have been listed
with their ranking and the numbers of
groups that identified each signpost as
important.
Step 2: D
ivide the participants into small
groups and ask them to rank the items
on the list handed out or the brainstormed list.
Step 8: At the end, a comprehensive ranking
list can be drawn up indicating which
signposts the group as a whole thought
were most important, in descending
order of importance.
Step 3: A
sk each group to give their first
ranked signpost one at a time.
Step 4: W
hen group 1 gives its first signpost,
the educator writes it down and checks
to see how many other groups listed it
as number 1 or at some other level and
records the figure next to the signpost
on the board or chart.
Step 5: The educator then asks the second
group what their number 1 was if it was
not the same as the first group’s, and
the process is repeated with the educator checking how many other groups
had it as their number 1 or ranked at
some other level.
A variation of ranking is to ask participants to place
themselves on a continuum based on their feelings
about some statement or concept. For example,
participants may be asked to indicate whether
particular conduct was democratic by standing
in a line and placing themselves on a scale from
“strongly agree” at one end and “strongly disagree”
at the other. Participants should then have an
opportunity to justify their ranking, to listen to
participants who disagree with their viewpoints,
and to re-evaluate their position based on the discussions they have heard. They could indicate this
by moving their position on the line.
Step 6: T
he educator then asks the third group
what their number 1 was if it was not
the same as the other groups’, and the
process is repeated with the educator
checking how many other groups had
it as their number 1 or ranked at some
other level.
12 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Example: Ranking the signposts of democracy
Use the above eight steps to get small groups of
participants to rank what they consider to be the
signposts of democracy.
1.6.3 Small Group Discussions
Small group discussions should be carefully planned
with clear guidelines regarding the procedure to be
followed and the time allocated. The groups should
usually not exceed five people to ensure that everyone has a chance to speak. The groups should be
numbered off by the educator (e.g. 1 to 5) or formed
by taking every five people in a row or group and
designating them as teams for group discussions.
The groups should be given instructions concerning
their task — including how long they will have to
discuss a topic or prepare for a debate or role play
and how the group should be run (e.g. elect a facilitator and a rapporteur who will report back to all
the other participants).
Groups should be told to conduct their proceedings
in such a way as to ensure that stronger participants
do not dominate and everyone has a fair opportunity to express themselves. A simple way of achieving
this is to use “token talk,” whereby group facilitators give each participant five matches or other
tokens and require the participants to surrender a
token each time they speak. Any person who speaks
on five occasions will have no tokens left and can
no longer speak.
In triads, the following steps can be used, for
instance in a dispute between political parties that
is being mediated:
Step 1: Explain the steps in mediation to the
participants.
Step 2: Introduce the facts of the case to be
mediated by the parties.
Step 3: Number the participants off in triads —
one, two, and three.
Step 4: A
llocate a role to each number, e.g.,
number ones will be Political Party A,
number twos will be the Mediator and
number threes will be Political Party B.
Step 5: Get the number ones (Political Party
A) to sit together and the number
threes (Political Party B) to sit together
to familiarize themselves with their
respective roles.
Step 6: Take the number twos (Mediators) outside the venue to walk them through
the mediation process so they know
what to do.
Step 7: Get the participants to return to their
original seats and to reconstitute themselves into triads of ones, twos, and
threes.
Example: Discussing the signposts of democracy
See the example in 1.6.2 above for how small
groups can be used to discuss the ranking of the
signposts of democracy.
1.6.4 Triads
Triads (working in groups of three) can be used to
get everyone involved in a particular exercise. They
are very useful for conducting mini-moots and
mediation and arbitration exercises.
Step 8: Get the number twos to introduce
themselves as mediators and to conduct the mediation.
Step 9: Get feedback from the mediators on the
results of their mediation.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
13
Step 10: Conduct a general discussion and
summary of the lesson.
Step 1: S elect the case study.
Step 2: Get the participants to review the facts
(ensure that they understand them —
in plenary).
Example: A dispute between political parties
Members of Political Party A wish to hold a public
meeting in a town area controlled by Party B. Party
A manages to get permission from a priest to hold
the meeting in a church hall. Members of Party B
who are very opposed to Party A’s policies threaten
to break up the meeting. Party A believes that the
local people should be free to choose whether or
not they wish to attend the meeting. The leader of
Party B says he or she knows that none of the local
people will want to attend the meeting as they will
support his or her party. Eventually the leaders of
Parties A and B agree to allow a mediator to help
them resolve the dispute.
Step 3: G
et the participants to identify the
legal issues involved (identify the legal
questions to be answered — in plenary).
Step 4: Allocate the case study to the participants (in small groups).
Step 5: G
et the participants to discuss the relevant law and prepare arguments or
judgments (in small groups).
Use the above 10 steps to get the participants to
conduct the mediation.
[Street Law South Africa 2004, p. 34]
Step 6: G
et the participants to present their
arguments (arguments on behalf of the
prosecution or plaintiff and defendant
should be presented within the allocated time — in plenary or in small
groups).
1.6.5 Case Studies
Case studies are usually conducted by dividing
participants into three large groups of lawyers for
plaintiffs or defendants (or prosecutors and accused
persons) and judges, and then further sub-dividing
the large groups into small groups to consider suitable arguments or solutions. Individuals from each
group can be selected to present arguments or to
give judgments on behalf of the group. A variation
might be for one group or set of groups to argue for
one side, another group or set of groups to argue
for the other side, and a third group or set of groups
to give a decision or judgement on the arguments.
Another variation is to use triads and have individuals engage in mini-moots — see 1.6.4 above.
When requiring participants to discuss case studies,
an eight step procedure can be used:
Step 7: Get the participants to whom the
arguments were presented to make a
decision (participants allocated the role
of judges or the participants as a whole
— in plenary or in small groups).
Step 8: C
onduct a general discussion and summarize (in plenary).
Case studies can be based on real incidents or cases
involving aspects of democracy such as criminal
prosecutions for intimidation or destruction of
political posters or civil cases involving challenges
to elections or interference with political meetings.
At the end, after the participants have made their
decisions, the teacher can tell them what happened
14 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
in the real case. Case studies help to develop logical
and critical thinking as well as decision-making.
Step 1: E
xplain the role-play to the participants
(describe the scenario).
Step 2: B
rief the participants who volunteer (or
are selected) to do the role-play.
Example: Is the Head of State above the law?
A hotly contested election results in a win for the
party of the President of a country. The opposition
parties allege that the election was rigged and
that the President used violence and intimidation
to get people to vote for him (or her). Evidence
emerges that the President had ordered violence
to be used against several local opposition leaders whom he (or she) alleged were orchestrating
violence against his (or her) party members in the
rural areas. Party members on both sides are killed
in the violence. There is direct evidence of the
President’s role in inciting the violence that resulted in the killing of two opposition leaders. The
Attorney-General charges the President with their
murders and goes on trial. The President denies
liability and objects to going on trial saying that the
Head of State cannot be prosecuted.
Step 3: Brief the other participants to act as
observers (give them instructions on
what to look out for).
Step 4: G
et the participants to act out the roleplay (this can be done by one group in
front of all the participants or in small
groups consisting of role-players and
observers).
Step 5: Ask the observers to state what they
saw happen in the role-play.
Step 6: A
sk all the participants to discuss the
legal, social, or other implications of
the role-play and to make a decision
on what should be done to resolve the
conflict in the role-play (this can be
done using small groups).
1. L awyers for the prosecution, give arguments for
the Attorney-General.
2. L awyers for the President, give arguments for
the President.
3. Judges, listen to the arguments and give your
judgment.
Step 7: C
onduct a general discussion and summarize.
1.6.6 Role-plays
During role-plays, participants draw on their own
experience to act out a particular situation (e.g.,
a politician presenting their election manifesto).
Participants use their imagination to flesh out the
role-play. Role-plays can be used to illustrate a situation.
The instructor should use the following seven steps
when conducting role-plays:
A variation of Step 6 would be to ask the participants to act out a conclusion to what happened
during the role-play.
Although the teacher sets the scene, he or she
should accept what the participants do. Role-plays
often reveal information about the student’s experiences as a story in itself.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
15
Example: Show the difference between democracy and other regimes — see case study on
Lebanon
Example: Questions to prepare learners for a mock
parliamentary debate — see the case studies on
Ghana and Mongolia
The teacher asks one student to play the role of
a democratic candidate in an election, presenting
his or her program of candidature. The teacher asks
another student to play the role of a non-democratic
candidate in presenting his or her program of candidature and nominates a third student as moderator.
The teacher divides the other students between
the roles of audience and media. One other student
should write all the remarks on the flipchart.
Educators should prepare learners for a mock
parliamentary debate by asking them some preliminary questions about parliament and questions to
help them prepare for the role-play — questions
such as:
1. Who works in parliament?
2. How do you become a member of parliament?
3. How many members of parliament are there?
After the speeches of the two candidates, the
remarks of the audience, and the comments of the
media, the teacher starts to show the difference
between the democratic and non-democratic candidates and their speeches and comments on the
reaction of the audience and the media.
4. What do members of parliament do?
5. How old would you have to be to become a member of parliament?
6. Where would you work?
7. What tasks would you have?
The teacher asks the students to present spontaneous speeches focusing on various topics of
democracy, some chosen by the teacher, others
referring to the speakers’ interests. This exercise
aims at defending democracy as an activist.
8. W hat skills would you need? What would you
have done before becoming a member of parliament?
1.6.7 Question and Answer
1.6.8 Simulations
The question and answer technique can be used
instead of lecturing. In order to use questions and
answers effectively, a checklist of the questions
and answers should be prepared to ensure that all
aspects of the topic have been covered by the end of
the lesson. The questions must be properly planned
beforehand to make sure that all the information
necessary for the lesson or workshop has been
obtained from the participants.
Simulations require participants to act out a role
by following a script. They are not open-ended like
role-plays and are carefully scripted to ensure that
the objectives of the exercise are achieved.
Instructors using the question and answer technique
should wait for a few seconds (at least 5 seconds)
after asking the question, in order to give participants
an opportunity to think before answering.
Instructors should be careful to ensure that more
confident participants do not dominate the question
and answer session.
Simulations usually require more preparation than
role-plays because the participants need time to
prepare to follow the script. The instructor should
tell participants about the persons or situation they
are simulating before they act out the scene and give
them time to rehearse. Simulations can be combined
with case studies (see 1.6.5 above), moots (see
1.6.12 below), and mock trials (see 1.6.13 below).
The procedure for conducting a simulation is similar to that for a role-play, and educators should
follow the seven steps suggested in 1.6.6 above.
16 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Example: Who will govern the shipwrecked
children?
that there should be a substantial number of participants in favor of and against the proposition.
Twenty-six young people — six teenagers and
20 children are adrift in the ocean after their ship
sank in a savage storm. All their parents and the
crew are drowned. For five days they drift until,
at last, they reach a deserted island. Here there is
food and water but no one else. What do they need
until a search party finds them? Everyone agrees
that there should be rules so that they can get on
with each other and live safely, but who is to make
the rules?
The participants may be divided into two large
groups and then subdivided into small groups for
their side, to prepare arguments for the debate. The
groups elect persons from their groups to debate
on their behalf. The debate is conducted, and the
participants then vote in favor of or against the
proposition.
Peter (age 17) is the first to speak: “I am the oldest
and the strongest, therefore I know best how to
protect us. So, from now on I make all the rules!”
The instructor can use the following seven steps to
conduct a debate:
Atiena (age 16) disagrees: “Everyone, including the
younger kids, should decide on and agree to every
rule. Their opinions count, too. Everyone must help,
and we don’t need bossy people giving us orders!”
Step 1: A
llocate the debate topic to two large
groups of participants and choose
which groups will argue for and against
the proposition.
Raphael (age 15) has a different view: “There are
too many of us for everyone to take part in every
decision. We’ll spend all our time talking! We
should, rather, elect people to represent us. Anyone
can be a representative, but they must be elected.”
Step 2: S ubdivide the large groups into small
groups of not more than five persons
each.
Mse (age 14) doesn’t feel that the younger children
are old enough to make decisions: “I say let the teenagers vote and make the rules for the younger kids.”
Step 3: G
et the small groups to prepare their
arguments and to choose two debaters
to present their arguments (one, the
main debater, to present the group’s
arguments and the other, a replying
debater, to reply to the opposing group’s
arguments).
1. Play the different teenagers making their arguments.
2. W hat are the advantages and disadvantages of
each person’s suggestion?
3. W hose suggestion do you agree with most? Give
your reasons.
4. W hich suggestion do you think results in a government which can be called democratic? Give
reasons for your answer.
Step 4: A
llow the main debaters who are in
favor of the proposition to present their
arguments first within the designated
time frame (5 minutes).
[South Africa: Democracy for All 1994, p. 2-3]
1.6.9 Debates
Debates should involve relevant controversial issues
such as: Should prisoners have the right to vote?
Should citizens who have emigrated from the
country be allowed to vote? Should 16-year-olds be
allowed to vote?, etc. A controversial issue means
Step 5: A
llow the main debaters who are
against the proposition to present their
arguments within the designated time
frame (5 minutes).
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
17
Step 6: A
llow the replying debaters who are in
favor of or against the proposition to
briefly reply to their opponents within
the designated time frames (1 minute
for each side).
The following steps can be followed when using a
game to teach about democracy:
Step 1: Introduce the game.
Step 2: Play the game.
Step 7: A
sk all the participants to vote on
which side presented the best arguments and deserved to win the debate.
A variation of the debate is “mini-debates” in which
all the participants are divided into triads (groups
of three) to conduct mini-debates with debaters for
and against the proposition in each triad, together with an adjudicator who controls the debate,
decides who the winner is, and reports back to all
the other participants. For instructions on how to
conduct triads, see 1.6.4 above.
Step 3: D
ebrief the game so everyone understands what the game was about.
Step 4: R
elate the game to the relevant aspect of
democracy that is the subject of the lesson.
For board games, see the case studies on Thailand:
the SIM Democracy Board Game and the Democracy
Challenge game in the South African Democracy
for All.
Example: Debating aspects of democracy
Games can be used to teach knowledge, skills,
and values.
Use the above six steps to conduct a debate on any
topic related to democracy, such as:
1.6.11 Hypothetical Problems
1. Should convicted prisoners have the right to
vote?
2. Should citizens who have emigrated from the
country be allowed to vote?
3. Should 16-year-olds be allowed to vote?
1.6.10 Games
Games are a fun way to learn because most people,
whether they are adults or children, enjoy playing
games. Games may be used as “ice breakers,” but
they may also be used to teach important topics
related to democracy and government. Games can
illustrate complicated legal principles in a simple
experiential format. Where games are used to teach
about democracy, they should not just be fun but
should also have a serious purpose.
Hypothetical problems are similar to case studies, except that they are often based on fictitious
situations. They can be more useful than case
studies in the sense that a particular problem can
be tailor-made for the purposes of the workshop.
Furthermore, they are often based on an actual
event (e.g. a newspaper report), even though it is
not an officially reported legal case. The advantage
of hypothetical problems is that appropriate changes can be made to the facts depending on the purposes of the exercise.
Hypothetical problems are particularly useful when
teaching about human rights in an anti-human
rights environment because reference does not
have to be made directly to the home country. Even
though the facts may be identical to those in the
home country, the hypothetical problem can present
them as occurring in a foreign country.3
18 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Example: The “Pen Game”
An example of a game that can that can be used to
teach values and knowledge and introduce participants to the need for law and types of laws that exist
in democratic societies is what the writer calls the
“Pen Game,” though there are many variations of this
game. In the Street Law SA version, the “Pen Game”
is played as follows:
Step 1: T he instructor announces that the need for
some sort of legal system will be illustrated
by playing a game.
Step 2: T he instructor checks that each student has
a pen (or a paper clip, a bottle top, or any
other suitable object). Once the instructor is
satisfied that each student has a pen (or other
object), he/she informs them that they will
be playing the “pen” (or some other object)
game.
Step 3: T he instructor tells the participants that as
it is a game they need to be in teams and
divides them into teams using small groups
or by rows if they are in a classroom setting.
Step 4: T he instructor tells the participants that since
they are in teams, they need to have team
captains and designates the participants on
the right-hand side of each group or row as
the team captains.
Step 5: The instructor checks that the participants know
who are in their teams, who their team captains
are and that they are playing the “Pen Game.”
Step 6: T he law teacher tells the participants to
start playing the “Pen Game” — ignoring any
requests for rules.
Step 7: T he instructor allows the participants to make
up their own rules regarding the game for a
couple of minutes, but then tells them that
they are not playing the game properly.
Step 8: T he instructor tells the team captains to pass
the pen to the team members on their left and
restarts the game. After a minute or so, the
instructor stops them and tells them that they
are not playing the game properly.
Step 9: T he instructor tells the team captains to hold
the pen in his or her right hand and then to
pass it to the team member on the left. After
a minute or so, the instructor again stops the
team captains and tells them that they are not
playing the game properly.
Step 10: The instructor tells the team captains to hold
the pen in his or her right hand, pass it to his
or her left hand, and then pass it to the team
member on the left. After a minute or so, the
instructor again stops them and tells them that
they are not playing the game properly.
Step 11: T he instructor tells the team captains to hold
the pen in his or her right hand, pass it to his
or her left hand, and then pass it to the right
hand of the team member on the left. After a
minute or so, the instructor again stops them
and tells them that they are still not playing
the game properly.
Step 12: The instructor tells the team captains to hold
the pen in his or her right hand, pass it to his
or her left hand, pass it to the right hand of
the team member on the left — but not to any
members wearing spectacles (or any other
distinguishing feature such as rings or clothes
of a certain color). After a minute or so, the
instructor again stops the game and arbitrarily
chooses one of the teams as the winners.
Step 13: T he instructor debriefs the game to find out
how the participants felt about it, why they
felt the way they did, and what they learned
from the game.
Step 14: Summary and conclusion: The instructor
checks that the participants understand
why society needs laws to prevent confusion and chaos; laws should not work retrospectively; laws should not discriminate
against people; people should have access
to impartial courts that apply the rule of law;
citizens should participate in the law-making process.
The “Pen Game” teaches knowledge and values —
participants not only learn why we need laws in society but also appreciate why laws are necessary. Law
teachers should ensure that games are structured in
such a way that they meet the learning outcomes for
the exercise. Not only should the game cover the various principles to be learned, but the instructor should
ensure that during the debriefing all the outcomes
have been achieved.2
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
19
When dealing with hypothetical cases, just as in
case studies, participants should be required to
argue both sides of the case and then to reach a
decision. To this end, instructors can use Steps 1
to 8 mentioned for case studies — see 1.6.5 above.
Example: Police action and the rule of law4
The law in a country is: “The police may use reasonable force to subdue people who are breaking
the law or otherwise using force against them.” Five
members of an organization opposed to the government are stopped by the police while they are driving
a car. The police recognize who they are, and when
one of the suspects takes out a gun, the police fire
their weapons and kill all five suspects.
as is sometimes done with case studies, and then to
elect a representative to present the arguments of
the group. Steps 1 to 8 for case studies can be used
for these types of moots — see 1.6.5 above.
Another method of presenting moots in street lawtype clinics that can also be used in democracy education is to use “mini-moots,” where participants
are divided into triads with a “lawyer” on each side
and a “judge” to control the proceedings, give a
judgement, and report back to all other participants
in triads — see 1.6.4 above.
Example: An appeal to the Supreme Court regarding election results
1. What is the law involved in this case?
Use steps 1-8 for case studies (see 1.6.5 above) to
conduct a mini-moot on an appeal to the Supreme
Court from an Electoral Court regarding a challenge to election results by a political party against
the Electoral Commission for allowing an election
to be rigged.
2. Who violated the law?
3. W hich actions took place here that may have
been violations of the rule of law?
1.6.12 Moots
Moots involve case studies or hypotheticals in which
participants are required to argue an appeal on a point
of law. Moots are different from mock trials because
there is no questioning of witnesses, accused persons,
or experts as happens in mock trials. All the questioning would have been done at the trial stage; the moot
is conducted at the appeal stage after the trial has been
heard. The only people the appeal court sees and hears
are the lawyers who argue the appeal.
In law faculties, moots are usually conducted formally, and participants dress in robes and argue the
appeal in a simulated moot court environment. Law
participants are required to carry out the preparation
work on an individual basis and to present their
arguments individually as legal counsel.
A variation used in street law-type clinics that can
be used in democracy education programs is for
participants to prepare arguments in small groups,
1.6.13 Mock Trials
Mock trials are an experiential way of learning that
teaches participants to understand court procedures. Mock trials take a variety of forms. In law
school programs teaching criminal or civil proceedings, the trials can be spread over a full semester
with participants being carefully coached on each
aspect of the trial. Participants are required to prepare and participate on an individual basis.
In legal literacy, street law, and democracy education programs, large numbers of participants can be
included in mock trials. For example, mock trials
using five witnesses and an accused can involve up
to 28 participants — eight lawyers for the plaintiff
or prosecution team and eight for the defense team,
three judges, five witnesses, an accused, a registrar,
a court orderly and a time-keeper.
20 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Participants are taught the different steps in a trial.
They are also taught basic skills like how to make
an opening statement, how to lead evidence, how
to ask questions and how to make a closing statement. Participants play the role of witnesses, court
officials, judges, and lawyers.
One lawyer on each side can make an opening statement, each lawyer can question one witness or the
accused, and one lawyer on each side can make a
closing statement. The chief judge can control the
proceedings, each judge can question one witness
or the accused, and one judge can be responsible
for giving the judgment. The registrar calls the
case, the court orderly keeps order in court, and the
time-keeper keeps the time.
The instructor should use the following steps to
prepare participants for a mock trial involving large
numbers of participants:
Step 1: D
istribute the mock trial materials to
the class.
Read through the charge or summons, the facts
of the case, and the witness’s statements with all
the participants. The instructor should:
1. Make sure that the participants understand
the facts of the case, the nature of the charge
(or summons), and the applicable law.
2. Get the participants to read through each
of the statements and to highlight those
parts of the statements that favor the
prosecution (or plaintiff) and those that
favor the defense.
Depending on the type of trial, participants
should be selected to play the roles of lawyers,
witnesses, experts, judges, registrars, court
orderlies, time-keepers, and court observers.
For the role of judge, it is often helpful to
invite a resource person, such as a lawyer, law
student, or real judge. If this is not possible,
instructor or students may act as judges.
Step 3: Prepare participants for the trial.
In order to involve the maximum number of
participants, the instructor should divide the
class into training groups. Participants should
be divided into:
1. Teams of lawyers, witnesses, experts, and
accused persons for the prosecution and
defense. Each team has the responsibility for preparing its side of the case and
needs to prepare opening statements,
questions for their witnesses and those
of the other side, and closing statements.
2. Teams of judges or magistrates (if more
than one judge or magistrate will be
used), who need to know how to run the
trial and must prepare questions for the
witnesses and a preliminary judgment
that will be subject to change after hearing the case.
3. Teams of registrars, court orderlies, and
time-keepers who need to be prepared for
the various tasks in a trial (e.g. arrange
time charts).
Step 2: A
ssign or select participants for the
various roles in the mock trial.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
21
the examination-in-chief (also known as direct
examination).
Procedure in a Mock Trial Hearing
A number of events occur during a trial, and most
trials must happen in a particular order. For the purposes of this chapter, a criminal trial will be used
as an example. (In a civil trial, the plaintiff or his
or her lawyer would bring the case instead of the
prosecutor.)
The following procedures occur in a mock
trial hearing:
1. The court is called to order by the court orderly.
2. The judges or magistrates enter and sit down.
3. The registrar calls out the name of the case.
4. T he judge or magistrate who controls the proceedings puts the charge to the accused and asks him
or her to plead.
18. The prosecutor cross-examines the accused.
19. T he defense lawyer re-examines the accused, if
necessary.
20. T he judge or magistrate may ask questions to
clarify certain issues.
21. T he same procedure is followed for all the witnesses for the defense.
[Note: In 17 above, the accused must be called before
the other defense witnesses if he or she is going to
give evidence — to make sure that the accused does
not change his or her story to make it fit with that of
the other witnesses.]
22. The defense lawyer closes the defense case.
5. The accused pleads guilty or not guilty.
23. The prosecutor makes a closing argument.
6. T he prosecution and defense teams introduce
themselves.
24. The defense lawyer makes a closing argument.
7. The prosecutor makes an opening statement.
8. The defense lawyer outlines the defense.
9. The prosecutor presents the case.
10. T he prosecutor calls the first witness and conducts the direct examination of the witness.
11. T he defense lawyer then cross-examines the
witness.
12. T he prosecutor re-examines the witness if necessary.
13. T he judge or magistrate may ask questions to
clarify issues.
14. T he procedure in steps 9-13 is repeated for each
of the prosecution’s other witnesses.
15. The prosecutor closes the case.
16. T he defense lawyer presents the case in same
manner as the prosecutor in 9 above.
17. T he defense lawyer calls the accused first (if he
or she is going to give evidence) and conducts
25. T he prosecutor may reply to the defense’s argument but only on matters of law raised by the
defense — not the facts.
26. T he judge or magistrate adjourns the case to
consider the verdict.
27. The judges or magistrates give the verdict.
In a criminal case, the following steps occur when
an accused is convicted. These steps do not occur
in a civil case. In a civil case, the judge or magistrate
decides in favor of one, the other, or neither of the
parties, and makes an appropriate court order e.g.
defendant must pay compensation.
27. If an accused person is convicted, the defense
offers evidence in mitigation (reasons why the
sentence should be reduced).
28. T he prosecution is given a chance to say why the
sentence should not be reduced or why it should
be increased.
29. The judge or magistrate sentences the accused.
30. T he judge or magistrate tells the accused that he
or she can appeal.
22 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Example: A Mock Trial hearing in an
Electoral Court
groups of 16. It is probably impractical to go beyond
16, and it may be better to end at eight in a group.
Use steps 1-3 and the procedures in the box above
to conduct a mock trial hearing in an Electoral
Court regarding a challenge to election results. A
political party challenges the Electoral Commission
for allowing an election to be rigged when the ruling party stuffed the ballot boxes in advance of
the elections. Create your own fact pattern, prosecution, and defense witnesses’ statements and
charge sheet.
The snowball method is as follows:
Step 1: A
llocate the same problem to a maximum of eight or 16 students and
require them to consider their solutions individually.
1.6.14 Open-ended Stimulus
Open-ended stimulus exercises require participants
to complete unfinished sentences such as: “If I were
standing for election” or “If I were the leader of the
opposition... .”
Another method of using an open-ended stimulus is
to provide participants with an untitled photograph
or cartoon and require them to write a caption.
Participants may also be provided with an unfinished story and asked to give their own conclusion
or to act out the conclusion in a role play.
Example: “If I were ...”
Step 2: D
ivide each cohort of eight or 16 students into pairs and ask them to discuss each other’s solutions.
Step 3: D
ivide the cohort into groups of four by
getting two sets of pairs to join together
to discuss their solutions.
Step 4: D
ivide the cohort further into groups of
eight by joining up two sets of four students each to discuss their solutions.
Step 5: I f the instructor wishes to end with
large groups, the groups of eight could
be asked to join together to become a
group of 16 to discuss the problem.
Complete the following sentences:
Step 6: G
et feedback from each final group in
turn regarding their solutions.
1. If I were President, I would …
2. If I were Prime Minister, I would …
3. If I were Minister of Education, I would …
Step 7: S ummarize the discussion and conclude the lesson.
4. I f I were Minister of Women’s Affairs,
I would …
5. If I were Minister of Justice, I would …
Example: How can citizens participate in a democracy?
1.6.15 “Snowball”
A “snowball” is a method of group work that begins
with students individually considering the solution
to a problem, then discussing it in pairs, then in
groups of four, then in groups of eight, and finally in
Use the above seven steps to conduct a snowball
discussion on how citizens may participate in decision-making in a democracy.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
23
1.6.16 Opinion polls
example below on whether citizens
who have voted in the past should be
able to vote for elections in the country
they have permanently left).
An opinion poll allows participants to express their
opinion on the topic of study. A poll allows for a
spread of opinions (for example, “strongly agree,”
“agree,” “undecided,” “disagree,” “strongly disagree”). Opinion polls can: (a) serve as the basis for
discussion; (b) give the instructor feedback on the
values, attitudes and beliefs of the participants; and
(c) be used to assess changes in attitudes.
An opinion poll can be conducted using the following steps:
Step 1: A
sk each participant to express privately
his or her opinion on a particular statement by stating whether they “strongly
agree,” “agree,” are “undecided,” “disagree,” or “strongly disagree” with the
statement and why (e.g. by individually
writing the opinion down).
Step 2: A
sk participants to share whether they
“strongly agree,” “agree,” are “undecided,” “disagree,” or “strongly disagree” with the statement and record
the results on a blackboard or flip chart
in a table.
Step 6: A
sk participants if any have changed
their views after hearing those of others, and if so, to explain why.
For instance, if during an opinion poll on whether
citizens who have voted should be able to vote for
elections in the country they have permanently left,
a number of participants say that citizens who have
emigrated should be allowed to vote, the consistency of their view should be tested by giving them
the example of a situation where citizens outside
the country would have more votes than the people
actually living in a constituency in that country. The
participants could then be asked whether they still
think that citizens who have emigrated from that
constituency should be entitled to vote for somebody who will not represent them as they no longer
live there.
Example: Should citizens who have emigrated
from their home country be able to vote in elections there?
Use the above five steps to conduct an opinion
poll on whether citizens who have emigrated from
their home country should still be able to vote in
elections in that country.
Step 3: A
sk participants to justify their opinions and to listen to opposing points
of view.
Step 4: I f no one takes an opposing point of
view, the instructor should ask participants what the arguments are for the
opposing positions.
1.6.17 Participant presentations
The following steps can be used to get participants
to make presentations:
Step 5: C
heck the consistency of the participants’ views by giving them examples of situations that may cause them
to change their opinion (e.g. see the
24 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Step 1: G
ive participants a topic on an aspect of
democracy to prepare for presentation
to the other participants.
Step 2: G
et participants to research the topic
by consulting books, magazines, journals or newspaper articles, or by asking
parents, relatives, or friends about the
relevant aspect of democracy and how
it affected their lives.
1.6.18 Storytelling
Storytelling is a very powerful educational tool,
as people identify with stories from an early age.
Hence, stories appeal to all ages and can be used to
educate both adults and children.
Step 3: G
et participants to present the results
of their research to all the other participants.
Many folk stories have strong moral and human
rights themes and are particularly effective if they
are well-known to the participants in the educational programs.
Step 4: G
et the participants to discuss each
presentation made by their colleagues.
When using storytelling during democracy education, the educator could do the following:
Step 5: S ummarize the findings in the presentations and relate them to the subject
of the lesson.
Step 1: R
ead, or ask a participant to read, the
story or get the participants to read it
together.
Example: Promoting civil and voter registration
and the secrecy of the ballot among marginalized
communities in Kenya — see case study on Kenya.
Participants were asked to conduct a situation
analysis to assess the communities’ needs. Civic
voter educators (CVEs) formed small groups based
on their constituencies in order to outline issues
and opportunities specific to their communities.
Each small group discussed the following:
1. Identify issues that may affect the secrecy of the
ballot in the constituency.
2. Identify risk mitigation strategies that may promote voter privacy and equal participation.
Groups were asked to present their findings to
the class, after which the Institute for Education in
Democracy facilitators gave feedback and identified thematic areas, target groups, sectoral priorities, and geographical scope. This provided a link
to sequential training sessions, which occurred on
the following day and outlined methods by which
CVEs could engage marginalized groups, provide
available culturally appropriate materials, serve as
a forum for partnerships and linkages, and measure
the level of existing civic education capacity.
Step 2: C
heck with participants that they understood what happened in the story.
Step 3: A
sk the participants in pairs to list what
they think are the good and bad things
that happened in the story that are relevant to democracy.
Step 4: G
et the pairs to share their ideas with
the rest of the participants.
Step 5: A
sk the participants to consider whether or not they think what happened in
the story was fair and democratic.
Step 6: I n small groups, ask participants to
decide what actions they think should
be taken to make what happened in
the story fairer.
Step 7: G
et the groups to share their ideas with
the rest of the participants.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
25
Example: “The Kingdom of Sikkal”
Use the above 10 steps to get participants to reflect
on the story below:
Sikkal is a country situated high in the mountains.
For centuries it has had little contact with the rest
of the world.
Although Sikkal is only a tiny kingdom, it has attracted a lot of interest lately. This is mainly because of the
unusual way in which society is organized there.
To begin with, no one in Sikkal ever goes hungry.
The Sikkalese people produce all their own food,
and it is shared out to whoever needs it. A house is
provided rent-free for every family. The size of the
house depends on the number of people in the family. Fuel for heating and cooking is provided free of
charge, as is a regular repair service. Should anyone
ever fall sick, a doctor is always at hand. Everyone is
given a free medical check-up every six months and
care-workers make regular visits to old people, families with young children and anyone else who needs
extra attention.
In Sikkal, the good things in life are available to all.
Each family is given a book of vouchers which they
exchange each year for different luxury items, e.g.,
Step 8: G
et the participants to think about the
ideas suggested and evaluate the potential consequences of each — negative
as well as positive.
Step 9: T
ry to get the class to agree on principles of fairness that would have made
what happened in the story fair.
Step 10: A
sk the class to consider whether their
own society lives up to their principles of fairness.
scent, soft furnishings, spices. The vouchers can be
traded in right away or saved up over a period of time
for something special.
How have the people of Sikkal been able to organize
all these things? As far back as anyone can remember, Sikkal has been ruled by a royal family. The
present ruler is King Sik III. He decides the number of
workers needed for each kind of work, e.g., growing
food, building houses, or medical care. The people
who do these jobs are selected at five years of age
and sent to special schools for training. Farmers are
sent to agricultural school, house-builders to technical school, health workers to medical school and
so on. Everyone else of working age is employed by
King Sik in one of his royal palaces.
The most amazing thing about Sikkal is that there
is no such thing as money. No one needs to be paid
because everyone already has everything they need!
You may be asking yourself whether anyone in Sikkal
ever complains about these arrangements. In fact,
this very rarely happens. The few people that do complain are looked after in secure mental hospitals. After
all, you would have to be mad to complain about life in
a society like this, wouldn’t you?
[©Citizenship Foundation 2001]
As an example, participants might be asked who
are in favor of and who are against members of a
recently removed brutal dictatorship being allowed
to stand for public office in new democratic elections. Participants would then have to take a stand
under a placard stating “In favor,” “Against,” or
“Undecided” and would have to articulate their
opinions on the topic.
The following procedure can be followed:
1.6.19 “Taking a stand”
Step 1: P
repare placards with headings: “In
favor,” “Against,” “Undecided,” or
other suitable headings.
“Taking a stand” requires participants to stand up
for their point of view by physically standing up and
verbally justifying their position. A controversial
topic should be chosen.
Step 2: I ntroduce the controversial topic on
which the participants will be required
to take a stand (e.g. Should convicted
26 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
prisoners have the right to vote?). Tell
participants that they may move their
position if they hear a particularly good
or bad argument.
Step 3: R
equest participants to take a stand
under the placard that reflects their
point of view.
Example: Should members of a recently removed
brutal dictatorship be allowed to stand for public
office in new democratic elections?
Follow the seven steps mentioned above to get
participants to take a stand on whether they are in
favor of or against allowing members of a recently
removed brutal dictatorship to stand for public
office in new democratic elections.
1.6.20 “Thinking on your feet”
Step 4: G
et participants to justify their position – the PRES formula
by making a single argument — alternatively giving participants under each
placard an opportunity to express their
point of view.
Step 5: G
et any participants who moved their
position to give their reasons for doing so.
Step 6: T
est the consistency of the students’
positions by introducing questions
involving extreme examples (e.g.
assume that in a suburb where a prison
is located, there are more convicted
prisoners eligible to vote than law
abiding citizens entitled to vote and the
prisoners may wish to vote a suspected
gang leader who is qualified to stand as
their candidate).
Step 7: S ummarize the discussion and conclude.
To assist the participants in articulating their viewpoints
in a logical manner, they may be required to use a formula like the PRES formula — see 1.6.20 below.
“Taking a stand” not only teaches participants the
skill of articulating an argument but also requires
them to clarify their values.
The PRES formula has been developed to help participants, particularly law participants, to construct a
logical argument when asked to think on their feet.
The PRES formula requires participants to present
their arguments by expressing the following: (a) their
Point of view; (b) the Reason for their point of view;
(c) an Example or Evidence to support their point of
view; and (d) to Summarize their point of view.
For example, opinions on the death penalty could
be articulated as follows using the PRES formula:
1. Argument in favor of convicted prisoners
being allowed to vote in elections:
My Point of view is that I am in favor of
convicted prisoners being allowed to vote.
The Reason is that I believe that by being in
prison they are already paying the price for
their crimes and should be treated equally
and not subjected to further punishment.
The Evidence for my point of view is the
Constitution, which provides that everybody is equal and may not be unfairly discriminated against.
Therefore, in Summary, I am in favor of convicted prisoners having the right to vote in elections.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
27
2.Argument against convicted prisoners being
allowed to vote in elections:
Steps when teaching the PRES formula:
Step 1: I ntroduce and explain the PRES formula.
My Point of view is that I am against convicted prisoners being allowed to vote in
elections:
Step 2: D
emonstrate the PRES formula.
Step 3: P
ose questions to individual participants on controversial issues and ask
them immediately to use the PRES
formula.
The Reason is that I believe that it is reasonable and justifiable to limit the rights of convicted prisoners who should not expect to
have the same rights as law-abiding citizens.
Evidence is that the Constitution states that
rights in the Bill of Rights may be limited
provided such limitation is reasonable and
justifiable.
Therefore, in Summary I am against convicted prisoners being allowed to vote in
elections.
3.Undecided argument on whether convicted
prisoners should be allowed to vote in elections:
Step 4: D
ebrief and conclude on the value of
the PRES formula.
The PRES formula can be combined with other
learning methods such as “Take a stand” — see
1.6.19 above. If participants are required to make
submissions rather than to express a point of view,
the PRES formula can become the SRES formula (Submission, Reason, Evidence/Example and
Summary). The PRES formula teaches the valuable
skill of participants being able to think on their
feet.
My Point of view is that I do not know
whether I am in favor of or against convicted
prisoners being allowed to vote in elections.
Example: Should public servants appointed by a
recently removed brutal dictatorship be allowed to
continue working in the civil service under the new
democratically elected government?
The Reason is that some countries allow
convicted prisoners to vote in elections and
others do not.
Use the PRES formula to argue why you are in
favor of, against, or undecided about allowing public servants appointed by a recently removed brutal
dictatorship to continue working in the civil service
under the new democratically elected government.
For Example, South Africa allows convicted
prisoners to vote but the United Kingdom
does not.
Therefore, in Summary I do not know
whether I am in favor of or against convicted prisoners being allowed to vote in
elections.
1.6.21 Problem Solving
When solving a legal problem, law participants
can construct a logical framework by using the
FIRAC formula. The FIRAC formula refers to the
following:
28 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
F = Facts
first political party breached the ethical rule
against interfering with or preventing the
meeting of the second political party: Using
given facts, determine whether the first political party’s conduct constituted interference or
prevention.
I = Issues
R = Rule of law
A = Application of rule of law to facts
Step 5: Reach a Conclusion
C = Conclusion
Step 1: Identify the Facts
The relevant facts concerning the case or problem must be identified: For example, the question may involve a detailed description of how
a political party has infringed on an electoral
code of ethics. The relevant facts that point to
unethical conduct must be identified.
Step 2: Identify the Issues
The issues or legal questions to be answered
must be identified: For example, the question
might be: Did the political party unlawfully
disrupt another party’s political rally?
After applying the rule of law or ethical code
to the facts, a conclusion should be reached on
whether the first political party breached the
ethical rule against interfering with or preventing the meeting of the second political party.
Example: Was it interference with the right of a
political party to hold meetings to convey its message to voters?
Use the above five steps to get participants to consider a set of facts (e.g. supporters of one political
party singing so loudly at a meeting of another
political party that the speakers for the latter cannot be heard) and to decide whether this would be
regarded as interfering with the right of a political
party to hold meetings to convey its message to
voters.
Step 3: Identify the Rule of law
1.6.22 Values Clarification
The relevant rules of law or provisions of an
ethical code must be discussed — if there are
conflicting rules these should be mentioned:
For example, the ethical rule against interfering with or preventing meetings of rival
political parties.
Step 4: Apply the rule of law to facts
Values clarification exercises encourage participants
to express themselves and to examine their own values, attitudes and opinions as well as those held by
others. Thus, participants are given an opportunity
to examine their attitudes and beliefs. At the same
time, they are asked to consider other points of view.
A value clarification exercise promotes communication skills and empathy for others.
The rule of law or provisions of an ethical
code must be applied to the facts: For example, the ethical code rule must be applied to
the facts in order to determine whether the
Values clarification is important for promoting the
development of the ability of participants to listen,
as well as their communication skills, their empathy for others, their ability to solve problems and
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
29
make decisions, their reasoning and critical thinking skills, and their ability to maintain consistency
regarding their attitudes and beliefs.
between the various points of view to
find the best result).
Step 7: C
onduct a general discussion and summarize.
The steps that can be used by instructors to teach
values clarification are the following:
Example: Should a political party that previously
governed as a highly repressive regime still be
allowed to exist in a newly formed democracy?
Step 1: A
sk participants to express their opinions (i.e. identify their position on an
issue).
Use the above seven steps to get participants
discuss whether a political party that previously
governed as a highly repressive regime should still
be allowed to exist and participate in elections in
a country that has been recently liberated from it
and has introduced democracy.
Step 2: A
sk participants to clarify their opinions (i.e. explain and define their positions).
Step 3: A
sk participants to examine the reasons
for their opinions (why they believe
something; the reasons for their position; and the arguments and evidence
that support their position).
Step 4: A
sk participants to consider other
points of view (e.g. by asking participants who hold opposite viewpoints
to present their views, asking participants to write down the arguments
for opposing viewpoints, or by the law
teacher presenting opposite views for
discussion).
Step 5: A
sk participants to analyze their position and other points of view (e.g.
by asking participants to identify the
strongest and weakest arguments in
support of their position and the strongest and weakest arguments of participants opposed to their opinion).
1.6.23 Fishbowl
“Fishbowls” can be used for observations of case
studies, simulations, role plays, or any other activity
where participants are required to analyze critically
what has transpired during the activity. They are
also useful when dealing with values and attitudes.
For instance, in gender-sensitivity exercises, fishbowls can be used to enable participants to observe
the differences between how women relate to each
other in given situations, compared with what men
do in similar circumstances.
In fishbowl exercises, it is important to involve the
rest of the participants by requiring them to observe
and report back on what they saw happening.
The steps in a fishbowl are the following:
Step 6: A
sk participants to make a decision
on the issue (i.e. participants should
re-evaluate and resolve the conflict
30 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Step 1: T
he instructor introduces the exercise
by mentioning that the participants
will be divided into small groups to
prepare for a role-play.
Step 2: T
he instructor divides the participants
into small groups of reporters inter-
viewing the political leader of a recently
formed political party — with not more
than five participants in each group.
Step 3: T
he reporters in the small groups prepare the questions they will ask during
the interview, and the political leaders
in their groups prepare what they will
tell the reporter about their new party
and why it was formed.
Step 4: T
he instructor calls for volunteers from
the groups to role-play the interview
between the reporter and the political
leader in front of all the other participants. The remaining members in the
groups are told that they are observers,
and the instructor gives them a checklist of things to look out for during the
role-play.
Step 5: T
he role-play is conducted, and the
observers make notes.
Step 6: A
t the end of the role-play, the instructor
asks the observers what they observed.
Step 7: T
he instructor conducts a general discussion and concludes the exercise.
Fishbowls can be used to teach knowledge, values,
and skills in combination with a number of other
learning methods.
Example: An interview with the political leader of
a recently formed political party.
Use the above seven steps to arrange for individual
participants to act as journalists and to prepare
for and participate in a fishbowl interview with the
political leader of a recently formed political party.
1.6.24 Jigsaw
The jigsaw method is useful for introducing participants to procedures such as legislative hearings where special parliamentary committees listen
to representations from different interest groups
regarding proposed changes in the law. The jigsaw
is used to enable the different interest groups to
consult with each other before they make representations to a parliamentary or other committee that
is hearing arguments from people or organizations
with different interests.
Jigsaws can be conducted using the following steps:
Step 1: B
rainstorm ideas to select two interest
groups in favor of the proposed law and
two that would be against it.
Step 2: D
ivide participants into two groups in
favor of the proposed law, two groups
against the proposed law (“home
groups”), and a group of parliamentary
committee members.
Step 3: T
he home groups meet to discuss the
arguments they will make to the parliamentary committee. At the same time,
the parliamentary committee discusses
the issues and the questions they will
ask the home groups.
Step 4: T
he home groups subdivide into
multi-interest groups, with representatives from each home group joining
a multi-interest group to hear each
other’s viewpoints. The parliamentary
committee continues its discussions.
Step 5: T
he multi-interest group members
return to their home groups, report
back to their colleagues, and in light of
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
31
what they have learned from the other
groups, the home groups refine their
arguments for the parliamentary committee. The home groups elect two representatives to present their arguments
to the parliamentary committee: one
to make the arguments, the other to
deal with questions. The parliamentary
committee continues its discussions.
Step 6: T
he home groups each have a limited
time frame (e.g. two minutes each) to
present their arguments to the committee. The committee has a limited
period for questions (e.g. one minute
per home group).
1.6.25 “Each one, teach one”
“Each one, teach one” is a technique that requires
all the participants to become involved in teaching
each other about a particular area of democracy.
Each participant teaches another about a topic in
the democracy program (e.g. one of the signposts
of democracy), so that by the end of the exercise all
the participants have learned about the whole topic
(e.g. all the signposts of democracy).
The following steps may be followed when using
the “each one, teach one” technique:
Step 7: T
he parliamentary committee has a
limited time frame (e.g. two minutes)
to consider its decision and to present
it (e.g. a further two minutes).
Step 8: T
he instructor debriefs the lesson and
summarizes.
The jigsaw is a fairly complicated procedure and
the time frames need to be carefully managed by
the instructor.
Example: A parliamentary committee hearing on
whether there should be a curfew on teenagers
being allowed out on the streets after 10 pm during
week nights.
Use the above eight jigsaw steps to get participants
to argue as four different interest groups before a
parliamentary committee with two groups for (e.g.
school teachers unions and parents associations)
and two groups against (e.g. the Human Rights
Commission and youth clubs) the imposition of
a curfew on teenagers being allowed out on the
streets after 10 pm during week nights.
32 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Step 1: T
he instructor prepares a number of
cards with statements on them that
cover different areas of the topic (e.g.
the signposts of democracy). A sufficient number of cards must be prepared
to ensure that the topic is covered in
accordance with the desired outcomes
(e.g. there needs to be a card for each
signpost of democracy).
Step 2: T
he cards are distributed to the participants, and the participants are told that
they must teach their colleagues what
is on the cards.
Step 3: T
he participants move around the room
teaching each other what is on their cards.
Step 4: O
nce all the participants have taught
each other what is on their cards, the
instructor ends the exercise.
Step 5: T
he instructor checks with the participants to ensure that they have all
learned what was on the cards.
Step 6: T
he instructor debriefs the lesson and
summarizes.
The “each one, teach one” procedure must be carefully controlled to make sure that all the information on the different cards has been transferred to
all the participants.
Example: Teaching about children’s rights — see
case study on Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Use the above six steps to teach participants about
children’s rights in a democracy.
A variation of the “each one, teach one” method is
used in Bosnia when discussing children’s rights,
where each child teaches the rest of the class by
showing and explaining the words on cards reflecting each right.
1.6.26 Visual Aids
Visual aids take the form of photographs, cartoons,
pictures, drawings, posters, videos, and films.
Photographs, cartoons, pictures, and drawings can
be found in text books, newspapers, magazines, etc.
Videos and films are usually available in libraries
and resource centers or from the organizations that
produce them.
Visual aids can be used to arouse interest, recall
early experiences, reinforce learning, enrich reading
skills, develop powers of observation, stimulate
critical thinking, and encourage values clarification.
Participants can be required to describe and analyze
what they see and through questioning, to apply the
visual aid to other situations.
When using visual aids the instructor may use the
following steps:
Step 1: P
articipants describe what they see
(focus on the elements of the visual aid
and describe everything seen, including any symbols).
Step 2: P
articipants analyze what they see (e.g.
how the elements of the picture relate
to each other; the point the photographer or artist is trying to make; the
meaning or theme of the picture; and
what the figures or people represent).
Step 3: P
articipants apply the idea of the visual
(i.e. apply the idea to other situations by
thinking about what the picture reminds
them of; whether they can think of other
events similar to it; and how the idea
applies to local people and communities).
Step 4: P
articipants clarify their beliefs (i.e.
express their opinions on the visual aid,
e.g. whether they agree or disagree with
the photographer or artist’s point of
view; how they feel about the idea; and
what they think should be done about
the problem shown in the visual aid).
Step 5: T
he instructor facilitates a general discussion and evaluates what the participants have learned.
Example: What does the picture tell us about
democracy?
Follow the above five steps to use newspaper or
magazine photographs or pictures by artists or
cartoonists to stimulate a discussion on a relevant
aspect of democracy.
1.6.26 Inviting Experts
Inviting experts can provide participants with a
wide variety of information, materials, and experience not available in any books. The use of experts,
such as political leaders or election officers, can give
participants valuable insights into how democracy
works in practice.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
33
Instructors should use the following steps when
using experts:
Step 1: S elect an appropriate expert (e.g. a
politician, an election official, a community leader, an NGO concerned with
democracy or voter education, or a
government official).
Step 2: P
repare the speaker and the class
beforehand (tell the expert and the
participants about the outcomes for
the visit in advance, e.g. ask the participants to prepare questions and inform
the expert about some of the likely
questions).
1.6.27 Field Trips
Field trips are useful because instructors can choose
both interesting and relevant places for participants
to visit. The trips should be arranged so that the
experience of the participants is consistent with the
learning outcomes for the exercise.
Participants should be prepared before the visit and
told to look out for specific things. They should also
be asked to record their reactions on an observation sheet that should be prepared beforehand. The
sheets can form the basis of a discussion when the
participants return from the field trip.
Instructors should use the following steps when
arranging field trips:
Step 3: C
onduct the class (get the expert to
give a short talk or get them to play
their normal role — e.g. a party leader
describing their party manifesto, an
election official describing how voting
occurs at a polling station, or to comment on how the participants did when
playing this role).
Step 1: D
ecide where to go (e.g. a voter education workshop; a polling station, a
political rally, etc.)
Step 4: D
ebrief the visit (participants should be
asked what they learned from the expert;
whether he or she answered all their
questions; and how what they heard from
the expert relates to what they had previously learned about the topic).
Step 3: C
onduct the visit (participants should
observe the activities; ask questions;
comment on specific things; and complete the observation sheets).
Example: A talk by an expert on democracy
Use the above four steps when inviting an election
official, an NGO concerned with democracy or
voter education or a government official to address
the participants about what he or she perceives to
be important aspects of a democracy.
34 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Step 2: P
lan the visit (participants and hosts
should be prepared for the visit: e.g. participants should have observation sheets
and hosts prepared for briefings).
Step 5: D
ebrief the visit (participants should report
back on what they saw; how they felt; what
they learned; and how what they learned
related to previous knowledge).
Example: A field trip to see democracy in action
Use the above five steps to take the participants on
a field trip to a debate in parliament or congress, a
voter education workshop, or a polling station.
1.6.28Direct Participation
ty to join their group.
Direct participation requires participants to become
directly involved in not only learning about democracy, but also for democracy by directly participating in a project that promotes democracy in
their country. The method uses a combination of
democracy education workshops and active participation in democracy projects in their communities.
A good example is the work done in Burundi in
the Schools for Democracy program carried out by
Idasa in partnership with the Burundi Leadership
Training Program and the Netherlands Institute for
Multiparty Democracy — see the example below.
Step 5: P
resent a third workshop on how
to develop an action plan for implementation in the community that will
organize members of the community to
work together to tackle the problem in
question using local resources.
Step 6: P
articipants organize the community
in terms of their action plan for a particular project through a small strategic
intervention using local resources.
Instructors should use the following steps when
arranging a direct participation program:
Step 7: P
articipants present and evaluate their
progress at a fourth workshop.
Step 1: P
resent a first workshop to participants on how communities operate
in a democracy and get participants
to choose a topic for a group project
involving the promotion of a certain
aspect of democracy that is relevant to
their community.
Step 8: P
articipants return to the community
to complete their project and prepare
a report.
Step 2: P
articipants in groups spend a few
weeks interviewing members of their
community regarding the chosen topic
and its implications for democracy.
Step 3: P
resent a second workshop on understanding how power operates in a
democracy and the need to build strategic partnerships with potentially influential community members.
Step 4: P
articipants continue interviewing members of their community and identify different sources of power and resources in
order to build strategic partnerships and
to invite some members of the communi-
Step 9: P
articipants present their final report
on the project to a fifth and final workshop.
Example: Directly participating in a democracy
project — see case study on Burundi
Use the above nine steps to involve participants
directly in a project involving an aspect of democracy in their community by combining democracy
education workshops and active participation in
the selected aspect of democracy.
1.6.29 “Dream Country”
The “dream country” approach uses phases to
encourage young people to think about democracy
in their country and how they would like to change it
in the future. The methodology requires participants
to progress through a current phase, a dream phase,
and a reality phase to identify what holds their dream
back, and eventually to plan some concrete action.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
35
The method has been used successfully in Thailand
— see below.
Instructors should use the following steps when
engaging in a “dream country” exercise:
Step 1: A
sk participants to visualize the current
political, societal, economic, and cultural situation in their country.
Step 2: A
sk participants to write down their
personal wishes for the development of
their country over the next ten years by
asking them what their country looks
like in their dreams.
1.7 Conclusion
The above mentioned interactive learning and
teaching methods are just some examples of what
can be done to ensure that participants participate
in an active learning process when being educated
about democracy.
There are many other methods that can be used.
Instructors are encouraged to be as creative as possible in their attempts actively to involve participants
in the learning process during democracy education
programs — whether learning about or for democracy. 
(Endnotes)
For more information, see the USAID Democracy Education
Survey (2002).
1
Step 3: A
sk participants what changes would
have to be made to political institutions
and society at large to achieve their
dreams.
Step 4: R
ecord the different wishes and suggestions by the participants in categories
and invite the participants to comment
on each.
2
South Africa - Street Law South Africa 2005.
David McQuoid-Mason, “Teaching Human Rights in a Hostile
Environment: A Lesson from South Africa” (2003) 22 Windsor
Year Book of Access to Justice, 213-226.
3
4
South Africa - Democracy for All (1994), 36.
Step 5: I dentify the areas where the participants
would be willing to become involved to
make their dreams a reality.
Example: What is your dream for your country or
community? — see case study on Thailand
Use the above five steps to conduct a “dream country” exercise for your country or community.
36 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
PART I:
Chapter Two:
— by Matthew Hiebert
Introduction
A compendium of best practices can be read in a
number of ways, and there is value in each. The
first way is to look at the individual practices.
This fits with the main goal of most best practices
guides, which is to identify good practices so that
they can be shared and hopefully replicated. In a
broad work such as this one, however, it is safe to
assume that the intent is not that any one practice
be copied directly from one country to the next.
Country contexts, like the democracies within
them, are extremely varied, and so it is with reflection and contextualization that effective initiatives
and approaches from one setting can be made relevant and viable in the next.
A second way of reading a compendium of best
practices is to look broadly across the document, to
study the various initiatives that have proven effective and to see what positive lessons can be learned
from them. Through such an analysis, it should be
possible to discern approaches that hold value at a
high level and may be generalizable to other contexts. Ideally, a number of such generalizations can
be distilled from the many individual initiatives. In
turn, these generalizations should help to inform the
development of new and authentic initiatives that are
guided by the same principles that helped the original best practices to be effective.
A third way of reading a compendium like this one
is to look at what is not said, what is absent. From
these gaps, it should be possible to identify missed
opportunities, as well as new avenues to explore that
may strengthen or complement the existing work
being done. It must be noted that this Best Practices
Manual on Democracy Education has not purported to
map all of the existing education for democracy (EfD)
initiatives around the world. Far from it. It is a curated
collection of effective practices from a broad sample
of countries. As such, any gaps identified should be
understood to be gaps among those practices included
in this guide and not necessarily absolute gaps or gaps
in any particular country or region.
In this section, I will focus on these latter two ways
of reading this Best Practices Manual. In so doing,
I hope to complement the other contents of the
Manual by providing some reflections and analysis
that go beyond the individual cases. I will attempt to
draw out some of the good lessons that can be generalized from the various practices and to identify
some of the possible gaps within and between them.
The contents of this section, then, are interpretations and are naturally somewhat subjective. They
are, however, guided by a particular perspective on
education that I believe is common amongst the
contributors, albeit not always articulated. Before
presenting reflections on the practices themselves, I
will discuss this educational perspective so that we
will be on the same page.
Education and Its Functions
A thorough analysis of what makes for good practice in EfD should include a clear concept of what
we mean by education. In colloquial usage, education is discussed in very narrow terms, essentially
grounded in the idea of direct instruction. This
has implications and effectively limits the scope
of educational debate to what can be described
in terms of knowledge and skills. Although we
may recognize that there are other, deeper kinds
of learning, these tend to be marginalized because
they don’t make sense within a context of direct
instruction.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
37
Education that is focused on knowledge and skills is
associated with a human capital model. Knowledge
and skills prepare workers for jobs. Education’s
function in this model is the training of capable
workers who can contribute, alongside other forms
of capital, to economic development. However, as
the practices described in this Manual make clear,
education is never just about knowledge and skills.
Whether it is acknowledged in formal curricula
or not, education systems play a major role in the
development of other, deeper aspects of a person’s
character, such as values, assumptions, habits, perspectives, understandings of power relations, and so
on. Other educational models take this into greater
consideration:
• H
umanistic models, for example, tend
to focus on education as a private good,
emphasizing its role in personal growth and
development and the development of individual autonomy and personal agency.
• E
mancipatory models take this a step further, emphasizing the political role of education in helping individuals and communities to overcome oppression and work
towards freedom and social justice.
• S ocial cohesion models emphasize community building. However, there are different perspectives on this. Some attempt
to build community through the development of mutual understanding and an
appreciation for diversity, whereas others
seek to erase differences or, in a somewhat
gentler manner, emphasize community
building through a common foundation of
experiences.
• A
uthoritarian models seek to develop functional workers who do not question author-
ity, who are obedient and complacent, who
lack initiative, and who have minimal skills
to think critically, to organize themselves,
or to envision changes to the conditions for
their lives.
• D
emocratic models, on the other hand,
work to cultivate the types of citizen characteristics which support a healthy, functioning democracy, things like a sense of
justice and personal responsibility, as well
as autonomy and individual agency.
Whether we agree with them or not, these different
models all emphasize the deeper aspects of character formation to which education contributes. The
main objectives of each of these models involve the
development (or suppression) of people themselves,
not just their capabilities. These approaches are not
mutually exclusive, and certainly ideas like individual autonomy can be developed alongside knowledge and skills for economic participation. The
best practices described in this Manual reflect, to
varying degrees, a range of different models. While
they all share common themes of democracy, some
emphasize emancipatory perspectives along with
this, whereas others emphasize, instead, community building through an appreciation of differences
or solidarity to confront important issues. While
knowledge and skills for democracy are discussed in
most of the cases, there is a much stronger emphasis
on the deeper levels of learning and development.
Discussing this type of learning becomes difficult
because it includes a wide range of developmental
outcomes. These outcomes include things like:
values and attitudes; assumptions about what is
normal; perspectives about different groups of
people; expectations about how decisions and disagreements are handled; as well as behavioral and
cognitive habits. To make discussion easier, we can
38 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
use the term “dispositions” to refer to these different
aspects of character development.
The Hidden Curriculum
In the context of EfD, the learning of these dispositions is particularly important. While it is important
that democratic citizens are knowledgeable about
their democratic systems and processes, as well as
issues of democratic importance, democracies are
founded on principles like equality and participatory decision-making. For this reason, educators
must take an interest not only in what citizens
know and can do but also in the kind of people
they are becoming. Knowledge and skills contribute
to development of character, but they don’t tell the
whole story. Unfortunately, most educational curricula remain heavily focused on knowledge and skills.
While official documents may make some reference
to character development, such references tend to
be relatively vague. Knowledge and skill outcomes
are usually quite clearly articulated, whereas character development is discussed in broad terms or
with token reference to attitudes or values — with
no indication of how those values may be inculcated, or the deeper levels of experience on which
they take root. Educators receive clear guidance on
the explicit contents that should be discussed in
their classrooms, but there is ambiguity around the
values and principles to be reflected in their educational practice. Naturally, this vacuum is filled by
those values and principles that are commonplace
in society, with the effect of reinforcing the status
quo, including power structures, stereotypes, and
social injustices. As noted by Arkady Gutnikov (see
case study on Russia), teachers are often, unfortunately, perpetuators of a number anti-democratic
tendencies in our societies. We trust that this is not
the intention of our educational institutions, but
it remains the case that their inadvertent practices
often work against the ideals of democracy.
Because character-related educational outcomes
tend not to be clearly defined and are often largely
unintentional, they are commonly referred to as
being part of a “hidden curriculum.” In the critical
scholarship on education, the hidden curriculum
is widely acknowledged to play a more important role in the political socialization of learners
than the formal curriculum. Learners’ experiences,
through years of immersion in educational settings,
are extremely formative. Those settings reflect values and principles, democratic or otherwise, and
learners’ experiences in them have serious political
implications because of the way in which they shape
them. It has become cliché to say that education is
inherently political, but we should expand on this
point to say that all aspects of the educational experience are political. Educational settings condition
us to an understanding of what is normal and to
our relationship with others and the world around
us. The contribution provided by Rolf Gollob (see
case study on Bosnia and Herzegovina) reflects this
point, drawing attention to many of the small things
taking place in the classroom that have formative
importance for students.
How the Hidden Curriculum
is “Taught”
The challenging aspect of the hidden curriculum,
and probably the reason why its outcomes are seldom clearly defined, is that the nature of the learning does not fit with the direct instruction approach
to teaching. Things like values and dispositions are
not taught in the same way as knowledge and skills.
This type of deep learning seems to fit better with
our concept of socialization than the way we usually
think about education. However, education systems
are indeed important sites of socialization. In these
systems, learners become habituated to certain ideas
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
39
and processes. They develop expectations about
what is normal and appropriate in different contexts. They develop ideas about different groups of
people, about their relationships with one another
and with authority figures, and they develop concepts about themselves that become part of their
identities. In the case of formal schooling, the effect
is even more powerful because it takes place over
many years, leading to behavioral and cognitive
habits that become deeply entrenched.
Consider, for a moment, the experiences of students in authoritarian education systems, a point
touched on by Gutnikov in discussing education
in Russia. The daily experience of these students
emphasizes passive complacence and deference
to authority figures. This experience provides the
primary message that students receive, and it is
deeper and more formative than any explicit information provided by the teacher. Consider, also,
the alternative. Consider learners who spend their
days in active learning environments, like those
described in many of the cases in this Manual,
where their daily experiences involve making decisions and developing strategies to tackle open-ended problem-solving activities on meaningful topics.
Consider the cumulative effects of regular group
work and debate in the classroom, guided along by
a caring teacher. Without even knowing the explicit
content of instruction in these two scenarios, it is
immediately clear that the learners will be on two
very different developmental trajectories.
Whether we are talking about formal or non-formal education, learners learn a great deal by the
educational methods themselves. The phrase “the
medium is the message” comes to mind, meaning
that the way in which we encounter information
is more formative than the information itself. This
is particularly true in the case of formal education,
where young people in their most formative years
are exposed day after day to a set of values and
principles. These values and principles are reflected in a wide range of factors that comprise the
daily experience of the learners. All of the policies,
procedures, and so on represent certain values, yet
these are often taken for granted. One of the recurrent themes in this Manual is that of pedagogy, and
the idea that active learning is an important part of
EfD, just as active citizenship is an important part
of democracy. Of course, the explicit content that is
taught also reflects values and principles, but the
content is eclipsed by the context in which students
are immersed each day. The teaching of the hidden
curriculum is all about this context.
This is not teaching in the conventional sense. It
involves carefully considering the different factors
that comprise students’ experiences and infusing
these with the values and principles of democracy.
The best practices in this Manual touch on a great
many of these factors. Collectively, the factors fall
into three broad categories. First, there are physical factors, which include things like the ways
the learning space is organized, the way desks are
arranged, the use of wall space, student ownership
for the space, and so on. Second, there are social
factors, which include things like the kinds of
teaching strategies used, the groupings of learners,
role modeling from the teachers, the types of peer
interactions that students engage in, and even the
way in which we talk about things. Third, there are
institutional factors. These include things like
admission processes, school governance (and the
involvement of students), the policies and procedures, daily routines and scheduling, which reflect
different priorities, academic reporting, discipline,
and so on. To these three sets of contextual factors,
we can add in the explicit content of instruction
to come up with a comprehensive model of what
learners are actually encountering.
40 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Education and Democracy
If we are interested in education as a way of supporting the development and enhancement of democracy, then we must look seriously at what values and
principles are reflected in these kinds of factors. All
of them can be fine-tuned to reflect democratic ideals, thereby contributing to the cultivation of these
ideals in our citizens. Students, young and old, are
learning constantly, not only through the instructions of their teachers but through interactions
with the rest of the world around them. The contribution of Susana Restrepo reinforces this point,
citing the Citizenship Competencies Program of
the Colombian Ministry of Education, “citizenship
education is not an isolated subject, but a shared
responsibility that transcends all areas and instances of the school institution and the educational
community.” The idea here is that all aspects of the
school are involved in civic education. It is not just
a topic, and it is not just taught by teachers.
From the standpoint of democracy, all experience
can be either educative or mis-educative. This is
to say, experiences either contribute to our development and engagement as democratic citizens, or
they contribute to something else. Often, different
aspects of our experiences conflict with one another, leading to confused messages. The absence of
certain experiences also has political consequences. What is taught and not taught, done and not
done, said and not said, who attends and succeeds
in school and who doesn’t, and the myriad factors
that comprise students’ daily experiences—these
are all political questions. This is the case in formal
schooling, as well as non-formal settings, the mass
media, and the many other ways in which we learn.
Our goals for education go well beyond teaching
about democracy. Indeed we are hoping to build
thriving democratic cultures, characterized by
rich dialogue and participation. While there are
indeed unifying goals related to this, democracy
is, as much as anything, a celebration of differences. As such, individual and societal considerations
need to be kept in balance. This inevitably results
in tensions and ongoing discussions, and that’s
partly the point. Democracies function through
deliberative processes where different perspectives come together constructively. Our education
systems have responsibilities towards all of the
different individuals who make up those disparate
perspectives.
Review of Best Practices —
Good Lessons and Possible Gaps
Self-reflection is an important part of personal
growth. And so, in addition to celebrating and
sharing best practices, there is value in reflecting
on those practices to draw out the lessons we might
learn from them, as well as possible gaps within and
between them. Determining positive lessons learned
from the practices is the easier of the two tasks. We
can look at the various contributions to this book
and draw out key points that may be generalizable
to other contexts.
In terms of analyzing gaps, one must bear in mind
that this Best Practices Manual has not attempted to
provide a comprehensive documentation of all the
good work being done to educate for democracy
around the world. Rather, it has attempted to provide a useful cross-section of those practices, representing the different types of good work being done.
This provides both inspiration and explanations for
others working towards similar goals. However, it is
still useful to look at the good practices presented,
collectively, in order to identify aspects of EfD that
may not be directly addressed by them, such that
we might begin to break down remaining barriers
and challenge the constraints within which EfD is
conceptualized and practiced.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
41
This analysis of lessons learned and gaps is presented in three parts. First, consideration is given
to access and coverage of EfD initiatives, looking at
which beneficiary groups, educational modalities,
and subsectors are represented among the practices, and which are not. Second, the analysis turns to
quality-related aspects of the practices in order to
look for useful generalizations. Third, the analysis
looks at the system level and the governance and
coordination of EfD initiatives, insofar as this can
be inferred from the practices as presented. The
fundamental criterion that underpins this analysis
is the ideal of democracy itself. We are looking for
ubiquitous democracy, even in institutions such as
schools that have characteristics that are, as Gollob
notes, inherently undemocratic. What we must bear
in mind is that there are no gaps in the experiences
of people — there are only alternative experiences.
The differences between these alternatives have
political significance. They will contribute to the
values and principles of democracy or to something
else. Wherever we do not see the values and principles of democracy, we should be concerned because
the enemy of democracy is not only tyranny but
also apathy and disengagement.
Access and Coverage
of EfD Interventions
To build a thriving democratic culture, access to
relevant educational opportunities should be ubiquitous. Ideally, we would like to see democratic
values and principles reflected throughout our
societies and across our educational institutions.
In considering gaps, therefore, it is logical to look
at the presence and absence of EfD opportunities
across different educational subsectors.
Naturally this includes the formal education and
training systems. Consideration should be given
to primary and secondary education, as well as the
pre-service and in-service training of those working within those systems. We should also consider
higher education programs related to democracy,
whether directly (as in political science programs)
or indirectly (as in those in journalism or law).
Beyond this, we need to consider specialized training activities for those involved with upholding
pillars of democracy such as human rights and the
rule of law. Those involved with the justice system,
policing, and the media are just a few examples of
important beneficiary groups.
It is a reality, however, that in many countries average citizens have limited formal education opportunities. In these countries, only a small minority complete secondary school, let alone higher
education. In functional democracies, democratic
participation is a right that should be afforded to
all. Therefore community-based and non-formal
educational programs are also an important consideration.
Good Lessons
Good lesson: Supporting beneficiaries
across different educational levels.
The practices in the Manual are distributed across
educational levels ranging from primary level, to
secondary, university, and non-formal adult community education programs. It is notable that many of
the initiatives in this Manual are targeting students
at the secondary level. This is an important age,
as students are nearing adulthood, where expectations for their democratic participation increase
significantly. It is somewhat surprising that just one
of the initiatives focused on university students,
particularly given the political activity of student
movements in many countries, however, it is noted
that several others involved university students in
certain capacities. Not represented in this Manual
are practices focused on very young children (lower
42 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
primary school and younger) nor specialized training programs such as those mentioned in the preceding introduction.
• F
urther reflection: None of the initiatives
specifically targeted young children, and yet
children at this age are extremely impressionable. What might be the foundations of
democratic citizenship that begin to develop at that young age, and how might they
be fostered?
way of increasing the potential impact of limited
training budgets.
• F
urther reflection: The concept of a “leadership ladder” involves providing incrementally more sophisticated opportunities
to emerging leaders so that their potential
impact is not limited by lack of opportunities as their leadership capacity grows. How
might this concept be applied in some of the
other initiatives in this Manual?
Good lesson: Supporting beneficiaries
across a wide range of subsectors, and
even bringing them together.
Good lesson: Providing extra – or
co-curricular activities that involve
learners in “doing democracy.”
Several of the initiatives, such as those presented by
Lee Arbetman (see case study on US) and Gutnikov
involved multiple beneficiary groups in different
capacities. This “bringing together” of people from
different walks of life has a great deal of potential
to enrich dialogue, understanding, and a sense of
community.
When school curricula are already over-stuffed with
contents, teachers may find it difficult to consider
integrating anything more to do with democracy.
Providing extra-curricular opportunities for students in which they are working through democratic processes provides first-hand experiential
learning without straining class time. Great examples include the moot court activities presented by
Arbetman and Gutnikov.
• F
urther reflection: Of the many schoolbased initiatives, few made mention of
involving community members as part of
the activities. How might schools become
more connected with the activities and
issues of concern to the communities in
which they are located?
Good lesson: Social change needs champions, and supporting change catalysts is
an effective approach.
It is costly to reach large numbers of citizens in any
initiative, and decisions need to be made around
whom to involve. The initiative presented by MarieLouise Ström (see case study on Burundi) mentions
that participants were carefully chosen based on
demonstrated leadership capacity. Working with
influential people as change catalysts is an effective
• F
or reflection: These types of extra-curricular activities are often led by civil society
organizations (CSOs), or those outside the
formal education system. How might these
organizations work with school systems on
a broader scale to benefit from their institutional stability and resources and to increase
their scope and impact?
Good lesson: Fostering social justice
by working directly with disadvantaged
groups.
In identifying their target beneficiaries, some of the
contributors noted specifically targeting disadvantaged populations. Mukti Rijal (see case study on
Nepal) focused on female beneficiaries, and Farkas
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
43
mentioned working with minority groups, whereas
Carla Chianese (see case study on Kenya) focused
on marginalized communities, and Arbetman noted
an emphasis on disadvantaged youth. Because of
systemic discrimination in many countries, among
other social injustices, it is important to consider
carefully the inclusion of minority groups, women,
and those facing exclusion for other factors such as
disabilities, geographic isolation, or extreme poverty. The empowerment of these groups is important
in the context of human rights and social justice
and therefore, democracy.
ments to incorporate more meaningfully
democratic values and principles into formal education systems?
Possible gap: Leveraging mass media
as an educational tool.
Mass media, including television, radio, and newspapers, are a major source of information and learning for average citizens around the world. While
none of the initiatives in this Manual focused on the
use of mass media, it was noted in some cases that
local media became interested in the programs and
provided some coverage of the activities.
• F
or reflection: How can we reconcile the
importance of the preceding with the importance of also working to instill democratic
ideals in those born to social and economic
privilege—given that this latter group often
go on to leadership roles?
Possible Gaps
Possible gap: Education for democracy
in the formal education system.
While a number of the practices in this Manual
focused on school-based initiatives, these initiatives
were led by individuals working at the school level
or by organizations outside the school systems.
The most prominent gap in this Manual is the
complete absence of focused EfD initiatives being
led by governments through their formal education systems. This gap may be partly a function of
the networks through which contributions to this
Manual were solicited, but that is surely not the
only reason. Governments invest billions of dollars
annually in education, yet democratic goals appear
to be secondary to those related to human capital
development.
• F
or reflection: How might we creatively
engage mainstream media, private or public, to make them partners in educating for
democracy?
Possible gap: Using the Internet
as a democratizing force.
It is commonplace to talk about the “democratizing
potential of the Internet,” and yet, none of the initiatives included in this Manual discussed making
primary use of the web for this purpose. Though
some initiatives like the one presented by Lee
Arbetman and Xinia Bermudez reference websites
where excellent tools and resources are available,
the potential reach and impact of e-learning initiatives, mobile learning, social media, and interactive
online tools is immense.
• F
or reflection: How might civil society
stakeholders effectively engage the govern-
44 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
• F
or reflection: In educational settings, technology is too often used for its own sake
without significantly enhancing the educational experiences of learners. Can you
envision online components that might
greatly enhance any of the initiatives presented in this Manual? What online tools
hold the most potential in educating for
democracy?
Quality and Rigor in
EfD Implementation
Good Lessons
comes in many different forms. It is interesting
to pause and consider for a moment the subtle
differences in meaning between: education for
democracy, education about democracy, democratic
education, democracy education, and more general
but related terms like civic education and social
studies. All of these approaches share similar goals
in making students more civically aware and contributing to the functioning of our democracies.
However, many of them focus on education as an
informative process and neglect the fact that education is also a formative process. Many readers of this
Best Practices Manual will recall our own experiences learning about democracy, often as a dry topic
disconnected from our lived experiences or buried
in a textbook alongside stale descriptions of other
political systems.
In a number of the initiatives presented, the contributors outlined practices where the learners were
involved with actually undertaking democratic
activities themselves. In some cases, this was simulated, as with the mock trial activities presented by
Arbetman and Gutnikov or the deliberative debates
presented by Xinia and Arbetman. In other cases,
the activities were not simulated but were confined
to the ssafety of the educational setting as with the
development of a class constitution as described by
Kokol. However, there were also instances where
the learners were actually out in their communities,
organizing, working together, and undertaking real
democratic interventions, as discussed by Ström,
Restrepo, and Boubacar Tall (see case study on
Senegal). Participating in democratic activities, simulated or otherwise, not only prepares students for
such participation in their community lives, it also
legitimizes this kind of participation as something
normal that normal people do.
Good lesson: Teaching democracy by
EfD is a concept that is always evolving, and it doing democracy together.
The concept of EfD that forms the basis for this gap
analysis is grounded in an understanding of education that emphasizes cultivating and empowering
people, not just filling their heads. Issues in democracy are not only related to deficits in knowledge
or skills. In working towards democratic ideals, we
need for EfD to support deeper learning as well as
the development of character traits and dispositions
that reflect democratic values and principles. This
requires critical thinking and engagement on real
issues that matter to learners. In analyzing lessons
learned and gaps among the best practices in this
book, we need to consider the content of learning,
as well as context through in which that content is
taken up. Moreover, we need to consider the actual
activities of the learners — that is to say, are they
practicing doing democracy as part of the learning
process.
• F
urther reflection: What types of behaviors are we talking about when we use the
phrase “doing democracy”? How might we
provide learners with more opportunities to
practice those things?
Good lesson: Using teaching strategies
that engage learners actively.
It is common sense that when learners are engaged
and active, they learn better. A great deal of educational research supports this. Consistent across the
best practices is a learner-centered pedagogical orientation. The engaging teaching strategies identified
in this guide are many. In the first section, David
McQuoid-Mason details more than two dozen such
strategies. Another excellent list is presented by
Hoda Chalak (see case study on Lebanon). In one
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
45
terrific example, Farkas discusses with some depth
the use of theatre as a pedagogical approach. Any
readers concerned with competing pedagogical
priorities need not be concerned. Gollob provides
some reassurance on the matter, indicating that, “no
distinction can be made between good teaching in
general and teaching children’s rights in particular.”
This point can be extended beyond child rights
to EfD broadly speaking. Democratic educational
practices are, quite simply, effective educational
practices, and vice versa.
make mistakes. These behaviors lay foundations
for concepts of justice and accountability as the
students grow older.
cile the expertise of the teacher and their
authority in the classroom, with the principles of democracy and the empowerment of
learners?
While democracies and democracy advocates
around the world share a number of common
values, each democracy is unique in the way it is
practiced and reflects aspects of the local socio-cultural context. Nancy Flowers (see case study on
South Sudan) identifies a number of cultural and
linguistic factors in South Sudan that have bearing
on democracy-related activities there. Among these
are the language dynamics of the group, considering
mother tongues, home dialects, and official languages, each with its own status and power. Flowers
also notes the challenge presented by the “culture of
silence” present in many countries with histories of
oppression, where people are hesitant to offer critical comments or even ask questions. In any group,
it takes time to break down these barriers and
establish trust and rapport between participants and
facilitators. This is an investment because from this,
we can establish a foundation for more active and
outward facing forms of democratic participation.
• F
urther reflection: In some ways, the
authority of a teacher resembles that of
government. Consider what accountability
means in this context and what implications
this has for a teacher’s practice.
Good lesson: Considering cultural and
linguistic factors and their relationship to
• F
urther reflection: How can we recon- democratic practice.
Good lesson: Teachers as role models of
democratic citizenship.
Reading between the lines in all of the cases presented in this Manual, we can see the importance
attached to the role of teachers as role models of
democratic citizenship. Most of the cases make
a clear reference to using democratic approaches
in education — essentially, modeling democratic
and deliberative practices. Chalak takes this a step
further, noting in the methodology of the program
that the teacher introduces him/herself to students
as an activist in human rights, citizenship and
democracy. This may seem like a small action, but
it is highly impactful for students to know that
their teacher cares deeply enough about something
to openly identify themselves as an activist for it.
Despite our attempts as educators to level out classroom hierarchies, teachers are naturally influential,
particularly with young students. It is critical,
therefore, that they model democratic behaviors.
This need not refer to activism, as this was just one
example. For younger students, it may be as simple
as demonstrating fairness and admitting when we
46 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
• F
urther reflection: Consider what is the
value of working in heterogeneous groups,
even when this means we may need to contend with breaking down hierarchies within
the groups.
Good lessons: Involving learners in
activities that make our democratic
institutions meaningful.
Our democratic systems are complex, with many
interrelated parts. In order to develop a robust
understanding of the different democratic institutions, it is important to have students look at them
in terms that are meaningful to them — so that
they can understand them in the context of their
everyday lives. Kokol provides an excellent example
of this, with the development of a school constitution. Simulation activities such as the moot courts
described by Arbetman and Gutnikov or the school
councils described by Eslami-Somea are further
examples of this.
• F
urther reflection: It is worth considering
what we think are the most important of
the democratic institutions in our countries. After identifying these institutions,
we can build on the experiences of the
cases mentioned above, to devise activities
that will make these institutions relatable
to students at different levels. Many already
have analogues at the school level of some
sort or another.
Good lesson: Age appropriateness in discussing democratic issues.
The cases presented in this Manual appear to
have taken age appropriateness into careful consideration. From collaborative activities in safe
and relatively structured environments like those
presented by Angeliki Aroni (see case study on
Greece) and Gollob, to the more outward facing
activities described by Ström and Tall, we can see an
appropriate progression. There are several aspects of
age appropriateness to consider. The first involves
gradually increasing the complexity and controversial nature of content, as learners gain the capacity
to understand and reflect on it. A second involves
the types of tasks and activities we ask students
to engage in, again, increasing in complexity and
ambitiousness. A third dimension involves working
outwards from what is most close and personal to
students, gradually increasing the scope of what we
ask them to consider. We can see traces of each of
these different progressions amongst the different
initiatives in this Manual. As Ted Huddlestone (see
case study on UK) aptly suggests, certain approaches such as storytelling are flexible enough that they
can be adapted to any age, given appropriate consideration to the specific content and the kinds of
activities and questions we develop around it.
• F
or reflection: What kinds of authentic
tasks might we engage young children in
that would provide a good foundation for
the more complex and controversial activities described in many of the initiatives in
this Manual?
Good lesson: Education about democracy is an important part of education for
democracy.
While much of this section has focused on education in and for democracy, it is still the case that
democratic citizens need to develop a thorough
understanding of underpinning concepts such as
law, justice, freedom, human rights, as well as learning about the democratic system itself. It is important to recognize the rigorous approach by which
the best practices in this Manual delve into these
concepts. Many of these go far beyond talking about
abstract concepts and delve into the real issues
that are of personal significance to students. Aroni,
for example, describes an integrated and active
approach to tackling the serious issue of discrimination and anti-discrimination with young students.
These are not the weakly presented lectures on
electoral systems that some of us were subjected to
as students—far from it! These initiatives present
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
47
democratic concepts and principles vibrantly, and
problematize the related issues through examples,
controversial positions, and engaging questions.
• F
urther reflection: What should be considered “core curriculum” in education about
democracy? What are the key things that
students need to know?
cases, however, was discussion of other factors that
have considerable impact on students. Institutional
factors, such as the policies and procedures that
provide the underlying structure for learners’ daily
experiences (consider school rules, assessment systems, scheduling and so on) and physical factors
like the way the learning environment is structured
and used.
Good lesson: The content of EfD can be
any important issue.
When we think about what might be the content
of education for democracy, our minds may naturally gravitate towards conspicuous features such
as elections, representation, separation of powers,
and so on. However, as Ström so aptly describes,
the content of education for democracy can be anything that people care about — even latrines! What
is inspirational in such examples is the evidence of
successful community-level organization to address
issues that are meaningful and significant to the
people involved.
• F
urther reflection: In the context of different age groups, from the very young to the
very old, how might we cultivate a sense of
engagement and self-efficacy by working
with the things they care about?
• F
urther reflection: Consider what a democratic school would look like from a policy
standpoint. How might physical spaces be
adjusted and utilized to reflect democratic
values and principles?
Possible gap: Democratizing the formal
curriculum of mainstream schooling.
While many of the initiatives presented in this
Manual make reference to curricula and training
materials developed to support EfD, none were
part of state sponsored formal curricula. Ultimately,
the learners have the most prolonged exposure to
these formal curricula, and however good, other
programs that are either added on or added in to the
formal curriculum stand a high likelihood of being
overshadowed or marginalized in students’ overall
experiences.
• F
urther reflection: What are the entry points
through which we might begin to reorient
formal curricula to better reflect democratic
ideals? How would a truly democratic curriculum be structured?
Possible Gaps
Possible gap: Reorienting institutional
and physical factors to support the learning of democracy.
In the introductory portion of this section, four
aspects to learners’ experiences were discussed as
having a bearing on the teaching of the hidden
curriculum (content, social, physical, and institutional). The practices described in this Manual
give excellent attention to two of these — social
factors and explicit content. Almost absent from the
Possible gap: Basic constraints of
quality education.
Each country faces its own unique challenges with
respect to providing quality education for all. This
Manual has taken an appreciative approach, looking
at the best practices in spite of any challenges that
may exist. In reflecting on these practices, however,
48 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
we must recognize that in many of the countries
there are severe shortages of qualified teachers, a
lack of adequate physical facilities, basic learning
materials, and so on. The challenges of educating
for democracy are not separate from these systemic
constraints, and in discussing possible gaps, we
must step back and recognize these shared fundamental challenges. There is hope, however, as these
are exactly the kinds of challenges which democratic citizens regularly organize and empower themselves to overcome.
• Further reflection: In what ways are quality
education and education for democracy aligned
with one another? Are there differences?
Management and Coordination
The management and coordination of education
initiatives are major factors in their outcomes. In
the context of EfD, these issues take on a special
significance because we are not only interested in
the outcomes but also the processes by which those
outcomes are achieved. In a democracy, citizens
have a reasonable expectation that their institutions — particularly those that are publicly funded
— will reflect democratic principles. Democratic
management, therefore, has an inherent value in a
democracy. Moreover, as the discussions above have
emphasized, the management of educational institutions also contributes to the experience of students.
This is to say that there is an educative value for
students when educational institutions are managed
democratically. Lastly, it is worth noting further that
democratic management practices are, quite simply,
effective. In addition to their inherent and educative
value, democratic management practices also have
instrumental value. Democracy, it turns out, is an
effective mode of governance.
In terms of identifying gaps, then, we should be
interested in the effective management and coordination of EfD initiatives. We should also be interested in the extent to which education systems and
initiatives themselves are reflective of democratic
values and principles. Examples of the values and
principles we might hope to see include the following, among others:
• P
articipatory governance – that beneficiaries
and stakeholders have a voice in the decisions that will affect them.
• M
utual respect – that all parties involved
demonstrate respect and appreciation for
one another and for diverse viewpoints.
• S ocial justice – that there are no major
differences in outcomes among genders,
ethnic groups, regions, or socio-economic
levels of students.
• T
ransparency and accountability – that
financial allocations and spending, and
other relevant activities be disclosed.
This Best Practices Manual has focused more on
the delivery of EfD than its management. This
means that management issues are not directly
discussed in the practices themselves. Analyzing
management issues to identify positive lessons and
possible gaps, therefore, involves some conjecture.
Admittedly there is some risk in this approach, but
a handful of reflections are presented nonetheless
in an attempt push the boundaries and possibly
to gain further insight into the practices that have
been presented.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
49
Good Lessons
Good lesson: Sharing of practices across
borders and organizations.
There is good evidence in the practices presented that there has been dissemination of effective
programs and models across borders and across
organizations. The relationship between the contributions of Arbetman and Gutnikov is an example
of the effectiveness of this sharing. In addition, the
contributions of Tall and Ström both mention that
the programs described have been modeled after
successful programs elsewhere. This Manual itself
is a further demonstration of such sharing, which,
it is hoped, will result in the broader adoption of
demonstrated best practices.
Good lesson: Leadership from
civil society.
It is worth noting the clear leadership being taken
by civil society in the advancement of education for
democracy. The practices described in this Manual
come, by and large, from inspired individuals and
community organizations that are challenging the
status quo of both democracy and education and are
pushing the boundaries of EfD practice.
• F
urther reflection: How might civil society
leaders spark the interest of government
bodies to take a more active interest in
democratizing education?
Good lesson: Striving to connect democ• F
urther reflection: What kind of interna- racy-oriented programs with formal edutional coordination would be most valu- cational structures.
able for the further advancement of EfD
globally?
Good lesson: Utilizing democratic
processes in the implementation of
initiatives.
A number of the initiatives presented in this Manual
have made a clear point of using democratic processes in their own management and implementation. For example, the contribution of Rijal discusses the utilization of horizontal peer teaching methods. The flattening of conventional hierarchies such
as “train the trainer” models reflects an important
step towards the democratization of institutional
cultures.
While the practices described in this Manual have
originated largely outside of formal education systems, there is a clear recognition of the importance of connecting these initiatives with formal
structures. As already noted, quite a number of the
initiatives are working in schools, in both co-curricular and extra-curricular capacities. A special
note should be made in relation to the Street Law
program described by Arbetman because the program is credit-bearing for the law students who
participate. These types of connections with formal
educational structures help to motivate participants
as well as to legitimize the programs themselves.
• F
urther reflection: When an organization
has a small number of highly trained experts,
how can hierarchies be flattened during the
implementation of programming?
50 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
• F
urther reflection: How could this example
be applied usefully in other scenarios, for
instance, having teachers earn professional
development credit for their participation in
EfD programs?
Possible Gaps
Possible gap: Limited engagement from
government stakeholders and lack of
upstream activities to support EfD.
Possible gap: Incorporating democratic
values and principles into the culture of
formal educational institutions.
Of the 16 initiatives presented in this guide, just one
dealt with democratizing education institutions at
the organizational level — Gollob noted the tension
of educating for democracy in institutions that are
not democratic themselves. It is worth questioning
whether this should be so. As public institutions,
what expectations might citizens reasonably have
regarding what goes on in schools and how they are
managed? What democratic principles should we
expect to see reflected in them?
• F
urther reflection: For educational purposes, why would it matter if educational
institutions operate democratically? What
might be gained or lost? What would a truly
democratic school look like?
Possible gap: Concentration of engagement in certain geographic areas.
The networks of organizations from which the best
practices in this Manual have been solicited have
strong representation in every region and every
continent, and yet the geographic distribution of
the contributions is somewhat uneven. A number
of countries and regions where there has been
intense democratic activity in recent years are not
represented. Particularly notable is the absence of
cases from countries of the Arab Spring. There are,
no doubt, tremendously important lessons to be
learned from the experiences of these and other
countries about how education can play a role in
the advancement of democracy and civil society.
• F
urther reflection: What substantive differences might we see in the practice of
democracy education from one region to
the next?
As noted previously, the cases in this Manual give little indication of engagement in EfD from Ministries
of Education or other official bodies. The practices
described are either being implemented at the community level or are being added into existing school
programs. Consideration needs to be given to activities that are happening upstream and particularly
those in formal education systems such as teacher
training institutes, curriculum departments, educational media units, policy development bodies,
credentialing processes, teacher unions, and so on.
Such programs would complement the best practices presented in this Manual by helping to create a
context for their proliferation.
• F
urther reflection: What kinds of programs might civil society stakeholders
initiate to bring about upstream change in
democratizing education systems? Which
government offices are most accessible to
civil society?
Concluding Comment
This analysis has been developed in an attempt to
complement the presentation of the best practices
in this Manual and to spark some higher-level contemplation and discussion around how the practice
of education for democracy might continue to be
advanced. The individual practices are exemplary
in their pedagogical approaches and their modeling of democratic ideals. Where relevant, specific
initiatives are mentioned by name to encourage
rereading of them with new eyes in light of ongoing
reflections, and questions have been presented with
each point to underscore the fact that reflection is
a process that is never complete. The good lessons
and especially the possible gaps are presented with
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
51
complete deference to the pioneers and experts who
have contributed them. There is a great deal to be
learned from each practice presented, and this analysis has only touched the surface. 
52 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
PART II:
Country Best Practices Reports
By: David McQuoid-Mason
Learning outcomes:
At the end of this part you will be able to:
1. D
escribe some examples of best practices
regarding democracy education in selected
countries.
2. U
se some of the examples of best practices
regarding democracy education from some
of the countries that have provided lesson
plans.
3. A
ppreciate some of the problems experienced when trying to introduce best practices for democracy education in some
countries
As previously mentioned, a standard format was suggested to the authors from the different countries, but
some chose to use their own approach.
The guidelines suggested for the country reports were
that the contributions should be short and the following format should be adopted:
1. Identifying the Problem: Case studies should
begin with an introductory sentence or two that
describes the problem that you are trying to solve.
For example, if your country has weak civil society participation, the problem could be stated as:
“Citizens fail to play an active role in civil society,
diminishing their influence on government decision making processes.”
2. Objective: Case studies should state the overall
objectives that the program is meant to achieve.
To address low citizen participation in the life of
the community, for example, the objective could
be to “inspire students to become active in civic
life by teaching about the importance of civic
engagement and organizing projects through
which students become involved in their communities.”
3. Target Audience: What is the audience for the
program? Are you working with primary school
students, secondary school students, university
students, or another group?
4. Methodology: Describe the scope of the project
and the specific teaching tools used to achieve the
objective. Provide a step by step overview of the
lessons used or courses taught.
5. Challenges: Provide an overview of the challenges or barriers that were faced, and how those
challenges were met and obstacles overcome.
6. Results: Was the program successful? How was
the project evaluated? Describe the project’s
impact.
A number of countries did not follow the above format, but in the spirit of democracy their formats have
been retained to give a flavor of the socio-political
situations in the countries concerned.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
53
“But that means that I have the right to
have a break!?”
By: Rolf Gollob, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Identifying the Problem
Results
Learning children’s rights has to be synonymous with
living children’s rights (CR). This means that teachers
have to be aware of children’s rights and incorporate
CR as a part of their teaching approach. However,
this is not as easy as it sounds. School itself is not a
democracy; it is an instrument of a democratic state.
School is obligatory for all, and there are limits. So,
how to handle this? The following example shows
how a young teacher in the young democracy Bosnia
and Herzegovina handles a difficult situation with
great skills.
Knowledge builds skills, which changes attitudes. After
this lesson, the students have learned a lot; this is obvious. My question: has the teacher learned his or her lesson? The teacher has built experience, but the lesson at
the end is only learned when the teacher reflects on his
or her reactions and can transfer them to a new situation. Teachers often lack real feedback. Inspectors have
to become critical friends. Colleague teachers need to
be invited for peer-to-peer feedback.
Objective
This classroom example is more of a story than a
teaching plan. It gives teachers food for thought:
How will I explain to unforeseen guests, visitors, and
inspectors why my teaching looks the way it does
from the point of view of CR? What is my own basic
understanding of the relevance of the ratified convention in my classroom?
Target Audience
Teachers of all levels need to think about their own
teaching style when it comes to the approach: the
method is half the message!
Methodology
Teachers should be well prepared but capable of flexibility to adapt to the needs required in a situation. This
is highly effective. A good teacher is also a reflective
practitioner.
Challenges
A situation is never repeated. Training yourself to be
prepared for the unforeseen is the challenge.
Example Lesson
The children are seated in groups. Their desks serve
as tables, and small cards with group names have been
set up on them. At one table, there are the rabbits, at
another the bears, and the tigers are seated around the
third. Full of excitement, a rabbit opens the envelope
on his table. The teacher asks the 8-year-old to read
the lines aloud.
The rabbit reads, “Children have the right to the
highest level of health and medical care attainable,”
and sits down again. “There is a number as well,”
the teacher calls. “We’re not doing arithmetic, but the
number is important!” Obediently, the rabbit stands
on his hind legs again and reads, “Article 24.” The
teacher is pleased. The rabbit may come to the blackboard in front of the class. Article 24 is shown on a
piece of colored paper shaped like a balloon. He may
affix it to the blackboard.
On the board there is space for many balloons.
Together they will carry a basket with the words
“Children’s Rights” written on it. The teacher puts
her arm round the rabbit, and she is as happy as he is.
“This is a right that you have,” she calls to the chil-
54 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
dren, and she continues, “In all the envelopes there
are many more rights. Each right is a balloon.” The
children have understood. Now many hands are up in
the air. They are all eager to open an envelope, read
and come forward, fix the balloon to the board and to
be hugged and praised.
This goes on for the next 45 minutes. Now it’s a
bear’s turn. She has drawn Article 30 and reads,
“Children belonging to a minority have the right to
enjoy their own culture, to practice their own religion
and to use their own language.” From the next table, a
tiger adds, “Children have the right to rest and leisure,
to engage in play, and to take part in cultural life and
the arts. Article 31.”
Interactive Teaching
Children’s rights must be addressed in such a way
that they are not just on printed paper but sentences
to be learned by heart like a formula in mathematics
or the grammatical rules on the use of tenses. There
is no reason why these topics require a heavy-handed
chalk-and-talk approach, but when it comes to children’s rights, we need to turn to interactive teaching.
The method of teaching carries at least half the message. Admittedly, this proposal is nothing new. For
our subject, we need to take three steps towards good
(or better) teaching. We can also call them three categories of learning processes.
Students should learn:
The third grade students are cheerful, enthusiastic,
and active. There is a lot of movement and whispering, and everyone wants to be heard.
How should these articles from the Convention on the
Rights of the Child be taught?
A case in point seems to be that no distinction can be
made between good teaching in general and teaching
children’s rights in particular. The difference is quite
simply the following: In some instances, it may be
possible to get away with the principles of teacher-centered instruction, just because the students have
been socialized that way. However, if we are dealing
with a subject like children’s rights, the inevitable
consequence is that teaching must have something to
do with the needs and the real experiences and queries of the students. For example, using Article 12 in
the Children’s Rights Convention: How can I let the
children learn that they have the right “to express their
views freely” and that “in all matters affecting them,
children’s views should be given due weight”? And
what affects children and adolescents more closely
than their own education and their school?
In the world of teaching and learning, the three stars
of knowledge, attitudes, and skills have offered guidance to many generations of teachers. They are well
known but have repeatedly been ignored. Teaching
often is narrowed down to only one of these categories, depriving whole continents of children of meaningful learning and education.
• t o understand the rights of the child
(knowledge),
• to implement children’s rights (skills)
actively, and
• to develop personal values and attitudes
(attitudes).
Knowledge
Of course, it is a sensible idea that children should
know the rights of the child. But must they be delivered in a dictation exercise, loathed as another boring
lesson in an exercise book? Rather, children’s rights
must be discovered and explored. Children should
identify key issues and collect information on them to
analyze. So this information must be worked on, processed, and questioned; to do this, the students need to
discuss their experiences and link them to background
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
55
information and categories, and they must obtain
insights into rules, concepts, and principles. In short,
there is no knowledge without understanding and no
understanding without active construction of cognitive structures. This applies not only to children’s
rights but to any topic of learning.
Skills
Students need the opportunity to apply what they
know and have understood actively, i.e. teaching should include project elements. Otherwise,
the whole exercise will remain very artificial and
distinctly remote from real life. Children’s rights
address real and often serious issues, encouraging
the students to participate in the worldwide efforts
for justice and social change. The first steps in
this direction would be in their places of residence
and their learning environment. Lessons on how to
design and decorate the school yard, how to monitor
the children’s way to school, prevent drug use, discuss behavior and class rules. … There is an endless
variety of topics for all grades and within all subjects. It is essential that any work on these topics be
deliberately and explicitly linked with the principles
of the Children’s Rights Convention. Many teachers
are working along these lines but quite often without
knowing what they are doing.
Attitudes
Learning and applying the knowledge is only half
of the work. A student who has not clarified his or
her personal views, or who was not given the chance
to express his or her personal attitudes and perhaps
actively change them, will tick off children’s rights
as yet another of those remote school topics, soon to
be forgotten as soon as the exercise books have been
closed and the school reports have been handed out.
In role-play settings, the different opinions should be
put to the test, and the students may practice arguing
their case. There must also be room for disagree-
ment. The teacher must not define “correct” opinions
and attitudes.
Take Small Steps,
But Take Them
Let us finally return to our example of the balloons
in a third grade class. The example demonstrates the
concept of a complex, multi-dimensional teaching
approach, as outlined above. This concept distinguishes between knowledge, skills of implementation,
the development of attitudes, and the expression of
opinions. We may point out that, by these standards,
there was a lot missing in this lesson. However, these
criteria should not be applied mechanically. Each
situation is unique. The most important point is that
the children were all actively involved and enjoyed a
cheerful lesson with a committed teacher. From now
on, they will associate children’s rights with colored
balloons, praise, and laughter, even though they might
not (yet) understand everything.
Finally, it should be noted that the lesson took
place in Gorazde in autumn 1998. Gorazde is the
Bosnian town that was cut off from the outside
world, isolated, and almost forgotten during the
war. To see topics like freedom of religious belief
and protection of minorities addressed in school is
an exciting experience and no easy task for students
and teachers. Let me give you one more detail from
this lesson: Some ten minutes before the bell was
to ring, the teacher asked her third grade students
what they had learned. A witty rabbit girl raised her
hand and remarked, with the whole class laughing,
“Now I know that there is this Article 31 that says
that I have the right to rest and leisure. That means
that now I have the right to have a break, doesn’t
it?” The young teacher looked at the child, and
one could see how intensively she was thinking.
The third grade girl certainly had her point, and
she proved that she transferred the lesson to her
own circumstances. Those of us watching the class
56 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
almost stopped breathing. How will this teacher in
the eastern Bosnian small town react? To make a
long story short, she had what might have been the
best possible reaction. She took the answer very
seriously, and doing so, she started one of those
discussions with an 8-year-old, that hopefully never
stops. She agreed that there are contradictions
inside such conventions and she gave the following
response: “Yes, you are right. The right for leisure
is an important one. I need to tell you, though, there
is also Article 28. This Article guaranties you the
right to education. And no, this is still education
time.” I don’t remember well. The girl might not
have been happy about the answer. But it might
have started a life-long journey of looking for
answers to crucial questions.
Teaching material: The balloon game
Educational The students become aware of universal values in human rights. They understand that
objectives:
some human rights are implicitly contained in others, but within the system of human
rights, it makes a difference if specific human rights are protected or not.
The students understand that human rights are inalienable and that the arbitrary abolishment of human rights borders on dictatorship.
Note on use
This game can be used as an introduction at the beginning of a lesson sequence on human
rights or as a transfer exercise at the end.
Resources
Envelopes, colored paper
Procedure
1. The teacher prepares balloons and papers slips with the Children’s Rights written on them.
2. He or she puts corresponding paper slips in different envelopes that are deposited on the students’
tables.
3. On the blackboard, a basket is drawn (or cut out) which, will be lifted up by the balloons the students
attach to it.
4. The students take out one slip of paper indicating a balloon after the other out of the envelope, read it
aloud and bring it to the blackboard. Short discussions take place. Some rights are understood, some
not. This is not important. The important thing is the effect of putting together the basket and the balloons.
Extension
If the basket is also cut out, the balloon can stay in the classroom for the whole school
year, and the discussions will go back to the different articles when needed or when something interesting happens.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
57
Schools for Democracy in Burundi
By Marie-Louise Ström, Burundi
Background
In 2011, Idasa, an African democracy institute based
in South Africa, was invited to partner with the
Burundi Leadership Training Program (BLTP) and
the Netherlands Institute for Multiparty Democracy
(NIMD) to develop communal Schools for Democracy
in Burundi. The project was based on the Idasa
School for Democracy model that has been widely
implemented in South Africa since 1992, as well as in
Angola (in partnership with Norwegian Church Aid)
and Mozambique (also in partnership with NIMD).
In Burundi, the project was piloted in two provinces,
Gitega and Cibitoke.
develop confidence in citizens to work collectively to
shape the community and society in which they live.
Target Audience
The 2005 elections in Burundi ushered in a period of
relative peace and stability after 12 years of civil war.
In 2010, troubled elections created new tensions in
the country, this time along political rather than ethnic
lines. Ongoing violence and political paralysis has led
to ordinary citizens often being deeply skeptical about
democracy. They also often feel powerless about
making significant changes in their circumstances.
What is needed is a shift from understanding democracy as the work of elected officials (a state-centered
view) to the work of the whole society (a citizen-centered view).
Participants in the Schools for Democracy in Burundi
are “ordinary” adult citizens, aged 25 and older, living
in small, village communities. The course materials
have a bias towards low-literacy learners, although
the educational levels of participants vary quite
widely. They are recruited primarily for the interest
they have shown in actively solving public problems,
rather than simply complaining about them. They are
individuals with civic energy who have already taken
some steps, no matter how small, towards addressing
an issue of common concern (from health and agriculture to the environment and youth development,
among others). They are involved in diverse community-based and faith-based organizations, although
not necessarily the leaders of these organizations.
They are also key players in informal community networks and individuals who “have the ear” of the community, even if they are not in recognized leadership
positions. They are not recruited to the project directly
via political parties, although careful attention is paid
to diversity of political affiliation. Some are politically active, but others are not. Every effort is made to
recruit women and men in equal numbers.
Project Objectives
Methodology
The overarching goal of the Schools for Democracy
in Burundi is to help build a culture of democracy and
promote human development by equipping citizens
with skills that enable them to be effective agents
of change capable of organizing their communities
and working across lines of difference and across the
citizen-government divide to address public problems
and create public goods. The Schools for Democracy
aim to nurture democratic habits and values and to
The Schools for Democracy implement an extended course, developed by Idasa and adapted for the
Burundian context, that consists of ten days of training, divided into five two-day workshops. The course
is delivered over a period of four to five months,
with three to four weeks between each workshop. It
includes an important practical component, with participants working on projects between the workshops.
The core themes are arranged as follows, under the
Identifying the Problem
58 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
overarching theme of “Citizen-centered Democracy”:
Workshop 1: Community and diversity
Workshop 2:Power
Workshop 3:
Everyday politics
Workshop 4:
Community organizing
Workshop 5:
Mutual accountability
The workshops are non-residential, so participants all
live within about a 10 km radius of the training venue.
Thirty participants are recruited for each course, and
they are expected to attend all the workshops. The
training is conducted in Kirundi, the local language,
by Burundian democracy educators who underwent
rigorous training by Idasa.
The educational approach of the Schools for
Democracy is inspired by traditions of popular education, with an emphasis on experiential, collaborative, and self-directed learning. A wide range
of participatory methodologies are used, including
constantly changing configurations of group work,
role-play, song, drawing, simulation games, moving
debates, interactions with the community and more.
Most importantly, the curriculum revolves around
group projects that participants implement in their
communities in the weeks between the five training
workshops. The project methodology is described in
more detail below.
The Schools for Democracy curriculum has a strong
focus on building democratic skills and habits, not
only instilling knowledge about democracy. Its
core conceptual framework differs from dominant,
state-centered conceptions of democracy that focus
mainly on elections, the functioning of democratic
institutions and deliberative processes that contribute
towards government policy-making at various levels. Rather, the curriculum is based on the theory of
public work. Public work is an emerging school of
thought in democratic theory, which stresses citizens,
not markets or states, as the foundational agents of
democracy. It emphasizes a particular conception of
the citizen as a co-creator of democracy and conveys
the firm belief that every citizen, regardless of social
status and education level, can play a concrete role
in solving problems and creating stronger and more
sustainable communities. In particular, the curriculum
focuses on the tools of broad-based community organizing, including:
• one-on-one interviewing
• discerning interests and
issues
• developing “public
narratives”
• interest- and powermapping
• identifying resources
• building public
relationships
• distinguishing
between public and
private “worlds”
• developing organizing
teams
• strategizing for
collective action
• building capacity for
collective action
• learning through
action
•m
utual accountability
and public evaluation
In the periods between the training workshops, participants work in small groups (of three to five people)
to help organize their communities to take action
on an issue of common concern. These organizing
projects form the experiential bedrock of the training.
Much of the “classroom” activity entails reflection on
these “field” experiences. Participants learn the core
concepts and skills by putting them into action and
analyzing their effectiveness.
Issues addressed by project groups during the Burundi
pilot included soil infertility due to over-exploitation,
production of strongly alcoholic liquor (moonshine),
teenage pregnancy, polygamy, disputes between herders and crop-growers, and, grittiest of all, the absence
of latrines.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
59
The group projects are structured in phases that correspond broadly with the workshop themes.
Phase 1
After the first workshop, the project groups
spend a few weeks interviewing members of
their communities (friends, family, neighbors,
and others who they think might have an
interest in the issue they wish to address).
The aim is to check whether there is indeed
fairly broad interest in the issue and to gain
insight into how diverse members of the
community understand it.
Phase 2
Following the second workshop, the project
groups continue with the interviewing process, continuing to deepen their understanding of the issue at hand, but also identifying
potential partners and paying attention to different sources of power and resources that
they might tap into. They create an expanded organizing team, inviting a few members
of the community to join their group.
Phase 3
Participants leave the third workshop with
the first iteration of an action plan that they
refine and begin to implement in the community. The aim is to organize members of the
community to work together to tackle one
aspect of the problem through a small but
strategic intervention, using local resources,
that can be wrapped up in the space of six
to eight weeks.
Phase 4
After evaluating their progress during the
fourth workshop, the project groups have
another few weeks to conclude their organizing efforts and to prepare their final reports
for presentation at the fifth and final workshop.
An important innovation of the Burundi program
is that trainers provide direct support to the project groups, visiting them at least once in the field
between each workshop. The trainers act as “organizing coaches,” helping the participants to think
through their strategies and deal with obstacles that
inevitably arise but taking care not act on their behalf.
Community organizing is complex, challenging work
and, as novices, participants in the training course
benefit from encouragement and mentoring.
Throughout the course, there is a strong emphasis on
mutual accountability. Project groups are encouraged
to evaluate their work and hold members accountable
for their respective tasks. The groups present progress
reports at each workshop, thus also developing skills
to make formal presentations in public. At the final
workshop, the groups present a full overview of their
projects, reflecting on the outcomes, the lessons they
have learned and their personal growth. Successful
interventions are celebrated, but less successful ones
are also mined for the rich insights they provide. The
primary emphasis is on empowerment, including the
ability to deal with setbacks, rather than on “success”
in terms of quick, visible results.
Challenges
In Burundi, four courses were conducted as part of
the pilot phase of the Schools for Democracy, and the
hope is to expand the program in the coming years.
To achieve its full potential, especially in the face of
constant resource challenges, there is a need for stronger institutional foundations for this work. Rather
than being driven solely by NGOs that are dependent
on foreign funding, partnerships with strong local
institutions such as churches would help to ensure
the sustainability of the program. There is also scope
to work with institutions such as schools and clinics,
for example, but this would require a radical change
in how these institutions perceived their relationship
with the communities in which they are based. Such
institutions, while helping to meet basic needs, also
have potential to help expand people’s imaginations
and become centers of democratic power and transformation in communities.
Empowering citizens and equipping them with skills
to interact confidently and constructively with government also requires a shift in thinking among
government officials themselves. Elected leaders and
those who work in government bureaucracies need
to shift from seeing citizens as hapless and needy to
60 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
seeing them as resourceful partners, full of talent and
energy, capable of initiating change themselves and
also of working in collaboration with government to
address public problems on a large scale. Although
the shift from a state-centered to a citizen-centered
conception of democracy might sound obvious to
some, it in fact poses a radical challenge to conventional ways of thinking about democracy all across
the world. It points to the need for a profound paradigm shift, something that is not easy to achieve but
that can happen through patient, strategic movement
building. There is a need for a more concerted movement-building approach, both within countries and
internationally, among democracy-building initiatives
based on a citizen-centered paradigm.
Results
Over the years, outstanding community leaders have
“graduated” from Schools for Democracy initiated
by Idasa. This was also the case in Burundi where a
number of graduates have taken leadership to resolve
conflicts in their communities, including serious conflicts between elected leaders. Some have continued
to work on the projects they tackled during their
training. All graduates have expressed transformed
attitudes towards politics, understood not only as
party politics, and a readiness to engage in the gritty
work of solving local problems together with others,
rather than sitting on the sidelines. Some have shown
increased interest in running for election at the local
level. All have talked about a radically new openness
to recognizing the potential talents and contributions
of fellow citizens and a sense of inter-dependence,
which is a particularly precious gain in a country with
a long history of bitter ethnic conflict. Community
members have reported seeing a marked change in
those who participated in the training and there is a
strong demand for the project to be expanded.
The latrine-building initiative mentioned above provides but one example of how participants and
their neighbors gained a sense of empowerment and
collective civic agency while addressing a concrete
problem in their community. The project group began
by investigating the number of latrines in a particular
area and how many households they served. They
spoke with members of every household to gain a
better understanding of why so few latrines existed
and how this impacted on people’s lives. They learned
that the problem was more complex than they had initially imagined, touching on a range of issues including land, ethnicity, public health, and basic awareness
regarding hygiene. The group gathered information
about an NGO that had been involved in constructing
latrines elsewhere and learned how to build a proper
latrine themselves. They identified families who were
keen to build latrines on their own properties and
negotiated the division of labor. First, the families
had to dig a pit for their latrine according to certain
dimensions. Then, everyone discussed how to obtain
resources for laying floor slabs and constructing shelters for the latrines. A representative group including
course participants and community members negotiated with the NGO to supply pre-cast floor slabs, then
they had to figure out how to get wooden poles and
other materials for the shelters. Someone suggested
that they approach the priest of the local parish where
there was a large stand of eucalyptus trees. They
prepared together how they would present the project
to the priest, including their objective to help build
a culture of democracy. The priest was supportive,
and by the end of the course, the group could report
that six new latrines had been constructed, doubling
the previous number in the area. Group members
announced that this was only the beginning of what
they hoped would be vastly expanded efforts to
address the latrine problem and some of the broader
issues associated with it.
The question might be asked whether the latrine
project can really be described as a democracy-building intervention. Absolutely! It exemplifies the
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
61
widespread understanding in the field of broad-base
organizing that while winning an issue is useful and
gratifying, the most important work of all is building the capacity and confidence of citizens to play
a more active role in shaping their communities and
their lives. This is the essence of a citizen-centered
understanding of democracy. In Africa, expectations for community development are closely tied to
democracy. Disillusionment with democracy often
springs from people’s failure to experience tangible
improvements in their quality of life. In this situation,
citizens become consumers of democracy and critical
spectators of electoral politics on the national and
local stage. There is no denying that governments
have a vital role to play in promoting democracy and
development, but many — if not most — of Africa’s
problems simply cannot be solved by governments
alone. The Schools for Democracy aim to counter
dependency, disappointment, and perceived failures
of democracy by emphasizing that democratic societies are built — often quite literally — by the ongoing,
collective efforts of every citizen. In the process of
collaborating to address shared needs, citizens learn
to work across lines of difference, however difficult it
might be, to respect people from other backgrounds,
listen attentively to multiple voices, accept the existence of diverse interests without demonizing the
other, build collective power, negotiate in savvy
ways, act inclusively and transparently, collaborate
with elected officials and hold them accountable
when necessary, and also hold each other accountable
in the public sphere. In short, they experience the
original meaning of democracy as people’s power.
education interventions have been terminated. The
Idasa coach, together with the trainers, conducted
rigorous evaluation of the curriculum throughout the
pilot process, making adaptations as necessary. A
final internal evaluation workshop took place involving BLTP, the local implementing partner, NIMD, the
trainers and the Idasa coach. Here is a sampling of
comments from this evaluation discussion, illustrating
the sort of feedback that was received throughout the
project.
The Schools for Democracy pilot project in Burundi
underwent a mid-term evaluation that was jointly
conducted by project leaders and an evaluator from
the Burundian Ministry of the Interior. Feedback was
extremely positive, and the Ministry expressed strong
support for the program, an extremely positive development in a context where a number of democracy
Equally, trainers reported remarkable personal change
and growth. Julienne Mukankusi said, “I have been
deeply touched. I had done research and training on
democracy before this, but I had not lived it. Now
I have seen that a skilled citizen has more power
than one can imagine.” Marie-Paule Ndayishimiye
commented, “The course has transformed me. I
Trainers spoke enthusiastically about the impact
of the course on the participants, in spite of doubts
they had initially harbored. Emmanuel Manwangu
commented, “I was afraid that people at village level
might get lost in the training, but even if it was a little
challenging for them at the beginning, their minds
were awakened, and they very quickly came up to
speed. Democracy started to become concrete for
them — the power to take action on issues right where
they live.” Juliette Kavabuha admitted, “I wondered
whether we would really manage to achieve results,
but I have seen that each citizen really does have
value and can contribute something. [The participants] have lost their fear of approaching the authorities. Citizens are now the initiators of change. This
is a huge change in the context of Burundi.” Eusébie
Nzorijana described a striking relocation of “politics,”
which decentered the concept and the practice: “At
the beginning, some participants were uneasy about
conducting interviews. ‘This is politics,’ they said.
Later a participant said proudly, ‘I can do politics
myself now!’”
62 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
know that I myself am capable of being an agent of
change.” Emmanuel Manwangu described the shifts
in understanding of the meaning of democracy and
citizenship: “This course changes one’s understanding of democracy itself. Our language has changed.
Citizens are at the center.”
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
63
The Challenges to Civic Education
in Colombia
By: Susana Restrepo, Colombia
Introduction
Colombia has a well-known history of struggle to
defend the prevalence of democratic institutions in
the face of protracted armed conflict and entrenched
social inequality. In addition to a major constitutional overhaul that sought to establish more participatory political structures, the country has engaged
in various efforts to cultivate citizenship through
its educational system. One of these efforts has
been the promotion of citizenship competencies as
a national policy. This policy, sprung from a series
of guidelines for educational institutions, has been
framed from a human rights perspective and defines
Citizenship Competencies as “the set of knowledge
and cognitive, emotional and communicative skills,
that joined together allow for a citizen to act in a
constructive manner in a democratic society.”1
The Ministry of Education has a Citizenship
Competencies Program that conceives citizenship
from three areas or perspectives: 1) Peace and coexistence (which refers to a coexistence that encourages
conflict resolution, by taking into account different
viewpoints and favoring dialogue and negotiation),
2) Democratic participation and responsibility (which
requires members of the community to get involved
in public affairs and exercise the rights and responsibilities that they have as citizens), and 3) Recognizing
differences, plurality, and identity.
The Citizenship Competencies Program holds that
“citizenship education is not an isolated subject, but
a shared responsibility that transcends all areas and
instances of the school institution and the educational
community.” This requires a contribution from all the
actors (teachers, students, principals, and parents) that
integrate the educational community.
Identifying the Problem
How can the concept of “transversality” be understood in school, and what are the risks that
it entails for the effective implementation of a
Citizenship Competencies Program?
Transversality is understood as the school’s opportunity to provide valuable content and experiences that
contribute to the formation of citizens who are socially engaged, critical, reflexive, intellectually independent, committed, team workers, and cognizant of the
problems that affect society.
Transversality requires schools to discuss citizenship
education within their own institutions and to agree
on common educational objectives. The competencies, abilities, and attitudes that are selected and
developed should ideally be met through various
school subjects. Assuming this responsibility in an
interdisciplinary manner both enriches a true democratic education with different perspectives and minimizes the gap between discourse and practice inside
school institutions.
In addition, more than 16 years of continuous work in
schools has allowed us to identify two obstacles for
working transversally on citizenship competences:
The explicit curriculum directs teachers to focus
solely on their subject activities when planning their
classes. Thus, activities that represent additional work
are not usually undertaken.
The hidden curriculum constitutes a clear manifes-
64 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
tation of the school’s culture, organizational climate,
interpersonal relations, authority figures, respect for
human rights, conflict resolution practices, and formative messages transmitted in the classroom by
every teacher. This curriculum can sometimes hinder the development of democratic environments in
school institutions.
Objectives
• To make citizenship competencies education a
shared responsibility across all areas and instances
of the institution.
• To build recognition around the advantages that
a transversal program, such as Project Citizen,
has on interdisciplinary work in the educational
community.
How Can Project Citizen
Achieve These Objectives?
Project Citizen has a strong emphasis on the area
of “democratic participation and responsibility” as
described by the Citizenship Competencies Program.
This area has probably received the least attention
out of all three components of the Program by the
educational system, thus accounting for teachers and
students’ lack of knowledge not only about the way
that the State functions but also about how individuals
relate to social and political institutions in their communities. It also contributes to the trend of students
and teachers’ disinterest towards public participation,
distrust in political activity, and discouragement
around correcting social problems.
Project Citizen aims to develop students’ interest in
the problems and necessities of their communities,
fostering a sense of teamwork, social commitment,
solidarity, and political effectiveness. The main goal
is the consolidation of a participatory consciousness
in the future citizenry, as well as a well-founded interest in their community.
Target Audience
Secondary school students, especially between grades
7 and 11.
Methodology
Project Citizen is based on a research methodology
that stresses the importance of citizens’ direct participation in the search for solutions for the problematic
situations that arise in the communities and for which
the State bears some responsibility. On one hand, the
project aims to foster a deeper knowledge about the
social and political situations that concern them. On
the other, the methodology enables them to identify
the agencies or bodies of government that are responsible for intervening in these situations and to demand
from them an appropriate and effective response.
Therefore, the project intends for the students to
know and understand that solving community issues
is not exclusively dependent on governmental action,
but rather that as citizens, we all have the right and
the responsibility to influence the decisions that are
made.
Project Citizen is an ideal program for democracy
education that positively responds to the identified
problem and meets all the requirements of transversal education that are highlighted in the Citizenship
Competencies Program.
While the program should ideally be led by a teacher
(usually from the social sciences) in a class that can
include it in the subject’s syllabus and has the necessary time for its implementation, its very nature as a
research project aimed at a broad set of public policy
issues that affect the lives of students provides a range
of opportunities for other areas of the curriculum to
contribute. The participation of other disciplines adds
to the project’s effort by providing time, space, and
knowledge that is specific to their area, thus allowing
the students to utilize their understanding of these
disciplines in their search for a solution.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
65
Project Citizen not only requires work inside but also
outside the classroom. The latter includes visiting
government entities, conducting surveys, and interviewing community members, among other activities.
This work has also counted on the participation of
parents, who join their children in the different extracurricular activities, while also contributing to the
search for possible solutions to the identified problem.
In order to achieve transversality in the development
of the project, the most important thing is to spend a
considerable amount of time planning, while taking
into account two factors: the research methodology
suggested by Project Citizen and the particular needs
of the problem selected by the students.
Fundación Presencia has designed two formats that
seek to foster dialogue between different subjects to
develop strategies for transversal work in the planning
stage of the project. One of these formats addresses
the problem selected by the students, and the other
focuses on the steps required to complete Project
Citizen.
Both designs allow students and teachers to plan activities that enrich their work, while fostering team work
and deliberation, thus encouraging a stronger commitment to their education over the course of the project.
Project Citizen’s main steps are:
• To help students clearly identify and prioritize the
community’s problems.
• To guide the process of identifying the governmental agencies that are in charge of offering
solutions to the selected problem from a public
policy perspective.
• To offer guidelines to analyze the existing public
policies addressing the selected problem.
• To encourage students to formulate public policy
proposals.
• To develop investigative, communicative, and
teamwork abilities.
Project Citizen has a manual for teachers and students, as well as various pedagogical tools and
methodologies that have been designed because of
the first-hand knowledge of the opportunities and
challenges associated with its implementation. This
knowledge is based on teachers’ reports, Fundación
Presencia’s researchers’ visits to the classrooms,
and students’ and teachers’ meetings around shared
experiences. It also comes from our familiarity with
the heterogeneity of schools in a diverse country like
Colombia and from our experience in over 13 years
of implementation, in which more than 80,000 students and 1,500 teachers have been involved.
Challenges
In order to ensure success and the effective adoption
of transversality in the program, our main objective is
to work hand-in-hand with the teachers and to organize training sessions that respond to their concerns.
The following are among the activities that we
carry out:
• Conduct a meeting with the principals, coordinators and chiefs of areas to present the program
before it begins.
• Train both social sciences teachers and an interdisciplinary group of teachers from grades 7 to 11
in the program’s methodology, thus supporting the
transversalization of the program.
• Establish the advantages of working interdisciplinarily on problems of the community that affect
everyday life.
• Generate from the different disciplines a sense of
identity and a commitment towards working on
the selected problem.
• Train educators who can subsequently train their
peers in different regions of the country.
66 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
• Develop tools and work formats that allow teachers to understand how to transversalize the program and to agree on the areas of knowledge that
are key in addressing the selected problem.
• The project has a participative pedagogical
approach that favors cooperative work and promotes the development of reflexivity, critical
thinking, and teamwork abilities.
Results
Based on these activities with the teachers and on the
implementation of the program according to the steps
outlined in its methodology, students, principals and
teachers have recognized that Project Citizen:
(Endnotes)
Formar para la ciudadanía … si es posible, Estándares básicos Competencias Ciudadanas, Ministerio de Educación
Nacional, 2003.
1
• Offers teaching strategies that invigorate the
educational practice, given that the pedagogical
processes are centered on the role of the learner.
• Promotes democratic and horizontal education in
the school.
• Fosters development in pedagogical relations
among peers and between students and teachers.
• Impacts both the explicit curriculum, contributing
to the fulfillment of standards for the development of citizenship competences and the hidden
curriculum (school climate, pedagogical relations,
definitions of authority).
• Provides space for the relationship between young
people and politics and citizenship practice to
develop.
• Generates in students a social commitment and
a sense of belonging within their communities,
separating them from traditional politics, which
responds to a distinct relationship between the
institutions and the public in which mistrust,
lack of participation, and alienation prevail. In
addition, Project Citizen encourages students and
teachers to establish a connection with the social
demands of their communities.
• The tasks that are developed and the problems
that are selected necessarily involve knowledge
and methods from different disciplines, thus deepening the understanding of those problems and
establishing clear working bonds and commitments from the teachers.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
67
Living Democracy through Physical
Education
By: Angeliki Aroni, Greece
Identifying the Problem
Objectives
Students’ ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious
diversity in the Paleo Faliro Elementary School of
Intercultural Education in Athens, Greece, is in many
cases the source of inter-group conflicts and hostility.
The school’s 102 students come from 30 different
countries on 4 different continents. The everyday
reality of the school is a representation of the situation facing immigrants in Greece as a whole. The
only solution is to live in a micro-society in which the
students have the chance and the duty to coexist with
us, the teachers, and with each other. On top of this
already challenging situation the student population
changes on almost a weekly basis due to fluctuations
in the number of immigrants in the country. “Living
Democracy” is the key concept needed to be mentioned in this context. By coping with this situation
we do not just learn but also live and experience
core elements of democracy — such as participation,
equality, rule of law and justice — in our daily routine. We thereby fulfill the core aspects of the Council
of Europe’s approach to Education for Democratic
Citizenship (EDC). Physical education provides an
ideal environment to implement the program. Its concrete focus on rules, action and cooperation gives students the opportunity to overcome language barriers
and become active members of the school community.
The program aims to facilitate the peaceful coexistence of the students. This goal was accomplished
by promoting respect and tolerance toward diversity
and by facilitating team building and social cohesion
through specially designed physical activities and
games, examples of which are provided in the lesson
plan that follows.
The objective of the program was to contribute to the
peaceful coexistence of the students. This was accomplished by promoting respect and tolerance towards
diversity and by facilitating team building and social
cohesion through specially designed physical activities and games.
Like all Greek elementary schools, the school consists
of six grades. It has two classes in each grade which
are organized by the students’ fluency in Greek. Thus,
A1 and B1 contain students who were either born in
Greece or possess fluency in the language, whereas A2 and B2 contain students who have recently
immigrated to Greece and speak little or no Greek.
During the 2011-2012 school year, tensions arose
between the students of the two 6th grade classes,
the target audience of the program. The first class
was comprised of 12 students (eight boys, four girls)
from Bulgaria, China, Egypt, the Philippines, Poland,
Russia, Syria,Ukraine, and Uzbekistan. The second
class was comprised of 13 students (ten boys, three
girls) from Albania, Brazil, Bulgaria, Georgia, Czech
Republic, Egypt, Syria, Ukraine, US, and Uzbekistan.
At the beginning of the year, conflicts between the
two classes, such as name calling, spitting, pushing,
shoving, and threatening violence, arose and escalated
during Christmas break. I attempted to solve the problem by bringing the two groups of students together
for classes in physical education. Nevertheless, this
attempt proved ineffective, as the conflicts simply
continued during the classes’ activities and games.
The students either refused to be placed in the same
team or, when they were on the same team, began to
fight with the opposing team. Therefore, we jointly
decided to use the “flexible zone” in order to imple-
68 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
ment an intervention project aimed at promoting
respect and tolerance towards diversity and teaching
the skills needed for peaceful coexistence.
Methodology
The flexible zone in Greek elementary schools is a
specific period of time set aside within the school
schedule (four hours per week for grades 1 and 2,
three hours per week for grades 3 and 4, two hours
per week for grades 5 and 6). In the flexible zone,
the choice of theme or topic is of primary importance
and depends on its usefulness and importance for the
students and teachers involved.1 We used two consecutive hours per week of the flexible time to bring the
classes together.
Consequently, a three-month intervention program was
designed, which consisted of one two-hour session per
week. The program was based on physical activities
and games because sport not only speaks a simple language — which simplifies intercultural communication
and is particularly attractive in today’s multicultural
society — but also “has been considered one of the
cultural practices most promising both for enhancing
interethnic contact and social cohesion and as a tool for
peace and reconciliation initiatives.”2
The OSCE’s “Guidelines for Educators on Countering
Intolerance and Discrimination against Muslims” were
used for designing the project.3 The OSCE Guidelines
are an excellent cross-thematic tool that can be used
as a supplement in classrooms for religious education,
history and civic education and in the school yard
during physical education classes. We applied the
guidelines’ suggested strategies on establishing a constructive environment, establishing ground rules for
discussion, establishing codes of conduct, enhancing
student democracy, and accommodating religion (such
as providing sports uniforms that respect religious
standards of modesty).
The following four didactic principles were adopted from the EU’s project on “Development of
Intercultural Skills through sport and physical education in Europe”4 :
1. E
xperience of strangeness as a starting point
for education
According to the first principal, familiar forms
of movement, activities, or games can be alienating. New, “strange” activities are introduced
into physical education classes for students to
realize that their own body culture is just one of
many. Exposed to a variety of activities, students
become aware of commonalities in games played
throughout the world but also of differences and
variations of games played within the same culture.
2. Team tasks on challenges
Students are assigned certain tasks and form
teams to achieve the goal. They have to cooperate
and through negotiation and conflict-management
skills, find the best way to confront the challenge.
3. Experience of recognition and belonging
Through verbal and non-verbal communication,
students evaluate and recognize their emotional,
cognitive, and social state that promotes their
sense of belonging to the team.
4. Reflection on the experience of strangeness
One of the objectives of intercultural educational sport teaching is to develop intercultural skills that can be applied outside of class.
Therefore, reflection on the learning process
and the experiences of the students are of
vital importance at the end of every session.
The fourth principle is also one of the strategies contained in the “Guidelines for Educators on Countering
Intolerance and Discrimination against Muslims,” in
which they suggest “Activities to Promote Reflection
and Critical Thinking.” According to their specific
goals, activities and games were divided into two
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
69
broad categories: cooperative team building games
and multicultural games. The combination of these
two served what Schulenkorf called the “dual identity status” in sport projects.5 For Schulenkorf, successful sport projects are those in which the ethnic
sub-identities of the participants are combined with
a superordinate identity. Such a status is encouraged
by designing sport activities in which different ethnic
groups participate together and where a shared set
of values and organizational identity is emphasized
(cooperative team building games), while at the same
time allowing participants to engage in culture specific activities (multicultural games).
Example Lesson
An essential element of all lesson plans used in the
program was the technique used for partner and group
selection. Interpersonal relationships are more likely
to develop when children are encouraged to work with
different partners and in different teams. In Greece, a
popular method for many physical educators is to ask
students themselves to form pairs or choose captains
who are then responsible to divide their classmates into
teams. In addition to lowering the self-image of those
chosen last, disagreements often occur, and teams tend
to always have the same members. Thus, a variety of
techniques were used like the Chinese method, the
Roman method, the Brazilian method, etc., in order for
students to have the opportunity to work with all their
classmates. In the Chinese method, for example, all
students stand in a circle, and on the teacher’s count of
three, they put one hand into the circle either palm up
or palm down. Students with palms up form one team
as do the ones with palms down. In the event that the
outcome is not even, the teacher asks the students from
the largest group to repeat it until the teams are equal
in number.6
Each session comprised of an introductory part in
which students were asked to recall the previous session and were then presented with the objectives for
the upcoming session. Students then participated in
warm-up games and a selection technique according
to the objectives of the session. This way, if the activities required teams with equally skilled members, an
equal number of boys and girls, or a random formation, an appropriate technique was used to ensure its
effectiveness.
The main part of the lesson usually contained two or
three games/activities/sports. Two examples of cooperative activities are the “the bus” and the “alphabet
relay.”
In “the bus,” students are divided into groups around
large mats (the “buses”) and are told that they will
need to cooperate with each other in order to complete
the activity. Their goal is to work together in order to
move a large mat around the gymnasium. Before the
performance of the task, there is a discussion about
what it means to cooperate: working together, looking out for others, helping others, speaking to others
respectfully, etc. They are reminded that there are
some important safety concerns they need to take into
consideration. They especially need to remember that
they are to move at the same speed as everyone else
in their group. If they go too fast, they can cause other
people — and the mat — to fall. They need to think of
others and not play around, as others can be injured.
They are then presented with the following six challenges, which illustrate the principle of sequencing,
the order in which you provide students tasks starting
from simple, and progressing to more difficult:
Challenge 1: Lifting the mat: Students lift the mat
together, and then bring it back down to the floor
(quietly) at the same time. The first time I verbally “count” to cue students to lift it, and then they
must find a way to do it themselves (suggestion:
70 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
each group designates one person as the “captain,”
to lead when the mat should be picked up and put
down). Students are reminded to lift it only to a
point where they are still able to see over the mat.
Challenge 2: The drop: Students lift the mat. At my
signal, they drop it at the same time. They are
reminded to move backward out of the way when
they drop it. If they all do it at the same time, it
will make a big boom! (Not necessarily fun for
you to hear, but the kids will love it!)
Challenge 3: The drive around: Students lift the mat
and walk around the gym while holding it up
(again, not higher than they can see over it), following directions to turn: straight, turn left, turn
right, U-turn, backward, etc.
Challenge 4: The pick up: A few students are spread
around the gym. A group with a mat comes over
to “pick up” each child. The group must drop the
mat, the student lies on the mat, and the group
picks up the mat. Safety is stressed here! It is
important that the student on the mat lies without
moving, and that the group brings the mat to the
floor safely without dropping it. They are not
allowed to pick up more than two students at a
time.
Challenge 5: The 360: Students turn the mat 360
degrees in one, then the other, direction.
Challenge 6: The tow truck: While half the class lifts
the mat up, the other half goes under the mat on
their hands and knees, all facing the same direction. The mat is gently brought down onto the
students’ backs, who then must move the mat to
the “garage” (sideline) without dropping it.
The second activity is called “alphabet relay” and is
an adaptation of an exercise I once read about that
adds the cognitive challenge of creating and correctly
spelling Greek words. The participants in four groups
(lined one behind the other) were placed on one end
of a defined area behind a clothes line for hanging
letters by pegs. On the other end, paper letters of the
Greek alphabet were spread out on a table. This game
included four tasks.
Challenge 1: On my signal, each team sends its first
player to the table to retrieve a letter and return to
hang it in their part of the rope. That player then
tagged the next runner on his/her team, who goes
to the table and retrieve another letter until the
teams created any Greek word with their letters.
Challenge 2: The teams have to create a four
letter word.
Challenge 3: The teams have to create a five
letter word
Challenge 4: The teams have to create a word with
as many points as possible. Each alphabet letter
had a certain point value, like in Scrabble. At one
point, certain students realized that a useful technique was first to think of the word and then to
run for certain letters. This proved to be valuable,
especially in the last challenge as they realized
that certain letters gave their words more point
value.
The activities above relate to all five basic elements
of education for democratic citizenship, as they are
active (emphasizing learning by doing) task-based,
collaborative (employing group work and cooperative learning), interactive (using discussion as the
groups need to talk about the best technique to solve
the challenge), critical (encouraging students to think
for themselves about the challenge), and participative
(as everyone need to contribute in order for the challenge to be effectively dealt with).7
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
71
The final part of the program was to debrief and
reflect in plenary. Reflection provides time and space
for students to make the connection between what
seems just another entertaining, fun game and student
centered activities that promote dialogue and that
provide students the opportunity to work together,
struggle, deal with failure and master the challenges
presented to them while building better relationships
and team cohesion. In addition, the reflection phase
provides time to teach about democracy, as it further
develops students’ skills in democratic citizenship
by elaborating on different democratic elements. For
example, “the bus” gives the opportunity to discuss
and raise awareness on the issue of responsibility
concerning the safety of participants involved in
the activity. Especially important in the reflection
phase is inductive learning, as proposed here; only
through reflection in the classroom will the experience become knowledge that can be used in another
context. Reflection allows a student to learn to view
school as micro-society and the society around him
or her, the reality of his or her community, region and
country.
Challenges
The main challenges of the project were the students’
initial resistance and rejection of the activity for two
reasons. First, they did not want to work with the
other class, and secondly, they were used to a competitive framework of physical education in which the
main objective of the games played was to win while
another team lost. Moreover, the lack of a common
language made discussions and reflections at the end
of each session very difficult.
Both challenges became easier with time as the
activities and games helped the students gradually
become a team, establish a collective identity and
a sense of belonging, and improved their language
and communication skills. Students from the same
ethnic and language background helped each other
with translations during discussions. The project’s
impact was assessed through a personal log I kept
for observations, comments, and notes. I had the students use a Learning Log throughout the project as an
assessment method to monitor their progress. It is a
central element of the training I had received in using
Arigatou International’s “Learning to Live Together”
manual on Intercultural and Interfaith program for
Ethics Education.8
Results
The students were asked to keep a personal log and
record their experiences, feelings and thoughts after
each session. It was intended to strengthen the process
of self-reflection and offer children the opportunity to
interact with their themselves. Unfortunately, it did
not work, as language proved to be a major issue.
Many of the students did not possess adequate language skills (neither in Greek nor in their native languages), making the process of writing an ordeal. So,
the impact of the project is based on my own personal
log’s input. Both challenges became easier with time
as the activities and games helped the students gradually become a team, establish a collective identity and
a sense of belonging, and improve their language and
communication skills. Students from the same ethnic
and language background helped each other with
translations during discussions. At the end of the project, students refused when they were asked to resume
their previous status of working separately in different
classes. Conflicts between students became minimal,
and several of them acted as mediators in conflicts
between younger students during breaks.
72 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
(Endnotes)
N. Schulenkorf. “Sport events and ethnic reconciliation:
Attempting to create social change between Sinhalese,
Tamil and Muslim sportspeople in war-torn Sri Lanka.”
International Review for the Sociology of Sport 45, 2010,
273-294.
5
JA Spinthourakis, E. Karatzia-Stavliotiand, and H.
Lambropoulos. “Teacher views and priorities towards
curricular innovation as a venue for effective citizenship
education,” in A. Ross (ed), The Experience of Citizenship.
London: CICE, Institute for Policy Studies in Education
(University of North London), 2004. pp. 399-406
1
J. Sterkenburg, “The values and limits of sport-based
social interventions in post-conflict societies,” in O.
Dorokhina, M. Hosta, and J. Sterkenburg, Targeting Social
Cohesion in Post-Conflict Societies through Sport Good
practices Handbooks, No. 1, Strasbourg: Council of Europe
Publishing, 2011.
R. Clements and S. Kinzler. A Multicultural Approach to
Physical education; Proven Strategies for Middle and High
School. USA: Human Kinetics. 2003.
6
2
R. Gollob and P. Krapf. “Living democracy”; Volumes I
- VI for EDC/HRE (Education for Democratic Citizenship
and Human Rights Education), Strasbourg: Council of
Europe Publishing. 2007.
7
Arigatou Foundation. Learning to Live Together:
An Intercultural and Interfaith Programme for Ethics
Education 2008. Available via: http://www.ethicseducationforchildren.org/ltl/showdoc.php?doc=Arigatou_E
8
OSCE. Guidelines for Educators on Countering
Intolerance and Discrimination Again Muslims: Addressing
Islamophobia through Education. 2011. Available via:
http://www.osce.org/odihr/84495?download=true
3
P. Gieb-Stuber. Development of Intercultural skills
through sport and physical education in Europe, Chapter 1
in Sport facing the test of cultural diversity Integration and
intercultural dialogue in Europe: analysis and practical
examples, Sports policy and practice series, Strasbourg:
Council of Europe Publishing. 2010.
4
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
73
The Concept of Civic Education Clubs
(CECs) in Ghana
By: Harrison Belley, Ghana
Background
A situational analysis of the Ghanaian democratic
scene shows the ignorance of most Ghanaians, especially young people, of the basic provisions of the
republican constitution of Ghana and concepts in
democratic governance. There is, therefore, the need
to consolidate democracy through the teaching of
fundamental concepts in democratic governance. A
program to address these shortcomings is imperative.
There is a general understanding and acceptance that
no limited civic education program can be successful.
Hence the adoption of the strategy for sustainable massive civic education through clubs, identifiable bodies,
and religious bodies among others is necessary.
Objectives
The goal of this effort is to broaden and deepen the
students’ knowledge of civic engagement and democracy among students. Through the concept of Civic
Education Clubs (CECs), students at all levels of the
educational system are taught to realize their roles as
future leaders and their role in consolidating Ghana’s
democratic system. The idea is to rally them around
the constitution to ensure active participation of the students in the socio-political life of the nation. Therefore,
the aims and objectives of setting up these Clubs are
to study, analyze, and discuss the content/provisions
of the constitution, to develop a practical commitment
to social justice, democracy and equality of all without
discrimination on the basis of race, religion, sex, and
level of education and to instill in members the spirit to
defend and preserve the constitution.
Target Audience
within the philosophy of catching citizens when they
are young and infusing in them the democratic and
constitutional culture. The concept is one in which
members of the club are encouraged to be analytic
and sharp in their relations and ability to carry out an
appraisal of constitutional and legal issues through
effective participation and learning.
The Clubs, by virtue of their character and role, are
non-partisan in their activities, which enables members to meet and discuss issues in a safe, participatory environment. They are voluntary organizations,
open to all Ghanaians irrespective of one’s religion
or political affiliation, ethnic origin and status. Any
number of persons, but preferably ten or more, may
form a CEC. The leadership of a Club is made up
of a chairman, secretary, organizer and a treasurer.
Patrons are appointed. They are expected to assist
and guide Clubs in the implementation of their policies.
Methodology
To realize the aims and objectives outlined above,
Clubs organize activities around debates, quizzes,
and a mock Parliament/Legislature aimed at improving members’ understanding of the constitution and
current affairs. One such activity is the constitution
game that is played among students in the Senior
High Schools and Tertiary institutions. The game is
a contest among the members of the Clubs in the
schools, and it is organized during the school term/
calendar. The constitution of the Republic of Ghana
forms the basis of this contest. With the help of their
patrons, club members study the chapters and articles
of the constitution.
The concept of Civic Education Clubs (CECs) falls
74 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Option 1
The contest is facilitated by the staff of the National
Commission for Civic Education. There are ten
regions and 170 districts in Ghana. The districts in
each region are divided into ten zones. Winners at
the zonal level meet to contest at the regional level.
Regional winners meet at the national level for the
national championship contest. The duration for each
contest is two hours. Questions are designed on issues
around the constitution, current affairs and democratic values.
Step 8: T
he moderator announces the final scores and
the eventual winner of the contest.
Option 2
Law-making role-play
This exercise is aimed at upper primary school
children and students in tertiary institutions. It lasts
from 60-80 minutes — excluding the time needed to
arrange the classroom into a Chamber of Parliament
which takes about 10 minutes. Upper primary school
pupils and students in tertiary school.
The contest takes the following form:
Lesson duration: 60–80 minutes
Step 1: T
he date for the commencement of the contest
is announced by the NCCE (facilitators).
Step 2: N
CCE selects moderators, time keepers and
recorders from institutions working in the
area of education and democracy.
Step 3: P
atrons of Clubs submit details of contestants,
minimum of 3 and maximum of 5, to the
NCCE.
Steps 4: N
CCE sets the rules of the contest and
communicates to club members through
their patrons, moderators, time keepers
and recorders. There are three rounds in
each contest, and 10 questions are asked in
each round. Contestants have 30 seconds to
answer each question.
Step 5: M
oderator mentions details of each contesting
club. Five clubs participate in one contest.
Step 6: M
oderator asks the questions after balloting
by the contesting teams for sitting position.
If a club is unable to answer a question, it is
transferred to the next club and becomes a
minor question which is offered to the next
club. If the next club answers the minor question correctly it then has a chance to answer a
major question.
Step 7: A
t the end of each round, the recorder
announces the scores.
Classroom set-up time: 10 minutes
Law-making is one of the main functions of the
Ghanaian Parliament. Laws are made through a process of debate and decision-making. During parliamentary debate, ideas are tested, challenged, refined
and ultimately accepted or rejected. This lesson
involves a role-play that demonstrates how proposals
for bills are considered by Parliament.
By participating in a role-play that simulates the
process of law-making in the Parliament of Ghana,
students will:
• Understand how Parliament debates and votes on
bills
• Understand the role of government ministers, the
opposition, minor parties and Independent members of parliament
• Explore the concepts of representation and scrutiny
• Inquire into real and current issues
• Practice public speaking, careful listening and
quick thinking
Questions are designed to generate discussion about
the role-play by exploring with students:
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
75
Who works in the Parliament? [Answer: 275
members of parliament elected by the people,
Parliamentary officers, including: the Clerk and
Deputy Clerk, Marshal, Hansard reporters, chamber attendants, and the parliamentary press corps].
How do you become a member of parliament?
[Answer: Members are elected by the people at
the general election].
Who do members of parliament represent?
[Answer: Members represent their constituents in
their demarcated constituencies].
How many members of parliament are there?
[Answer: There are 275 members of parliament
— one from each of the 275 constituencies].
The scripts for the exercise have been designed by
NCCE to provide a framework for the role-play. The
scripts include specific roles that can be assigned to
students and indicate what they have to do and say.
Before the role-play begins student are taken through
the following exercise:
Step 1: A
rrange the classroom into a parliamentary
chamber by arranging chairs and tables into a
horseshoe shape.
Step 2: A
sk the students to watch the “What is
Parliament?” video.
Step 3: A
sk students to imagine that they are members
of parliament.
•
•
•
•
•
How old would they be?
Where would they work?
What tasks would they have?
What skills would they need?
What did they do before becoming a member of
parliament?
Step 4: T
ell students that as members of parliament,
they represent the views of their electorate
and may be working as part of a team (e.g.
they may belong to the government or opposition).
Step 5: D
ivide the class into government, opposition,
minor parties, and independent members of
parliament using the numbers to gain the right
proportions for parliament.
Step 6: S
elect a Speaker to play a non-debating role
from the government group who must exercise authority in the room.
Step 7: S
elect a Clerk and Marshal who are also parliamentary officers who do not debate or vote.
The teacher should play the role of Deputy
Clerk. [This role does not require active
participation but puts the teacher in a central
position in the room so they can assist with
the running of the role-play].
Step 8: G
et the students to elect their party leaders
— the government elects the Prime Minister
and the Opposition elects the Leader of the
Opposition.
Step 9: S
elect a Minister from the government group to
introduce the bill relevant to his or her portfolio
(e.g. the Budget Bill would be introduced into
Parliament by the Minister of Finance).
Step 10: S
elect a Shadow Minister from the government group to oppose the bill relevant to his
or portfolio.
Step 11: S
elect the party Whips (managers) for each
group to count the total vote at the end of the
debate.
Step 12: Start the role-play.
The role-play commences as follows:
Step 1: T
he Clerk rings the bell and instructs the
members to stand.
Step 2:The Marshal leads the Speaker into the chamber, carrying the Mace on his or her right
shoulder.
Step 3:The Marshal announces the Speaker, places
the Mace on the table and moves to their seat.
76 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Step 4:The Speaker tells everyone to sit down and
begins the session.
Step 5:The Clerk stands and reads the rules of the
chamber and the title of the bill (first reading).
Step 6:The Minister introduces the bill and the
Shadow Minister responds to the bill.
Step 7:After a few speeches by members from each
side, the debate ends.
Step 8:The members vote on whether or not to
accept the bill.
Step 9:The Whips count the votes.
Step 10: T
he Speaker announces the result of the
debate.
Step 11:T
he House is adjourned and the members
stand.
Step 12: T
he Marshal leads the Speaker from the
chamber holding the mace.
After the role-play, the following questions are
explored with students:
1. Do government bills always pass this chamber?
[Answer: Not if a majority of independent members and opposition members vote against the bill.
The government needs to secure a majority of
members to vote for the bill in order for it to pass].
2. What happens if the vote is a tie? [Answer: The
Speaker votes on the bill to break the deadlock].
3. Why are the independent members of parliament
and minor parties important? [Answer: If they
hold the balance of power in the House, they can
determine whether a bill will pass or not, and they
can put pressure on the government to amend the
bill].
4. What other major steps must a bill go through to
become a law? [Answer: After it has been debated
and voted on it is sent to the legislative drafters to
include any amendments that were adopted by the
House. After that the amended final version of the
bill is tabled by the relevant Minister to be passed
at its second reading. If it is passed it becomes an
Act and is sent to the President for signature].
Challenges
A major challenge for the concept of the CECs is
the exiting leadership of the Clubs. These executive
members of the Club who complete their courses
leave the institution, and new executives have to be
elected and taken through orientation. Membership
changes every year.
To overcome this challenge, it was recommended that
the leadership of the Club should be a blend of junior
and senior students, and the Club should embark on
a strategy of encouraging new members to join the
club.
There has been the challenge of inadequate preparation of teachers who facilitate the process of democracy education in the Clubs. Periodic orientation for the
teachers was used to tackle this problem.
Results
The idea of the CECs is to provide mechanisms for
the development of civic skills to help members to
act constitutionally and democratically. After the
contest, members are able to identify national symbols of the country and are imbued with the sense of
patriotism. They are also able to describe functions
and processes such as check and balances, separation of powers, judicial reviews and also developing
competence in explaining and analyzing how such
systems as the legal, political, economic, parliamentary, and executive systems work. Finally, it increases
the rate of civic participation and nurtures competent
and responsible participation in civic education activities. The central focus and purpose of the concept is
to foster the development of citizens to participate
actively and knowledgeably in public affairs.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
77
Towards An Active Democracy with
Theatre in Education
By: Atilla Farkas, Hungary
Identifying the Problem
Since the first democratic elections took place in 1990,
the democratic institutions of Hungary have come a
long way. Unfortunately, the euphoria surrounding
political participation has withered, and most of the
population has become disillusioned with politics and
making a difference. Political disillusionment is particularly strong among young people under 25.
As we prepared the program, we mainly used the
Drama Improves Lisbon Key Competences in
Education (DICE) research, which shows most of the
relevant information for our practice.1
Even though DICE shows that 78 percent of the
respondents believe that education is the primary area
in which the state should take the interests of young
people into account, we can clearly see that marginalized and socially deprived children are neglected
by the Hungarian government. By elementary school,
social mobility is already determined. Children of
poorer families often enter the school system with
disadvantages that could only be compensated by a
well-developed and properly financed system. This
problem is further intensified by segregation in the
school system. Comparative international research
shows that the Hungarian education system is one of
the most socioeconomically segregated in the world.
Additionally, geographic location often determines
a young person’s chance of success in the education
system. The smaller the settlement in which they
live, the less chance they have to obtain an advanced
degree. There is also a clear correlation between
schooling and political activity; a significant difference has been documented in political interest, activity and awareness depending on the level of schooling
completed. Lower level schooling indicates less political interest and activity.
Objective
The project was aimed at addressing the problems
listed above by bringing Theater in Education (TIE)
programs to young people from minority groups and
marginalized backgrounds. Our project creates participatory TIE programs that empower participants and
give them an understanding of the basic concepts at
the heart of democracy. This affords them an opportunity to relate their own social and personal values
to the concepts of democracy and express them artistically. The project aimed to cross borders, not only
between arts and education but also national, social,
ethnic and individual boundaries. The project also
offered young people and their teachers new models of democratic dialogue and stimulus for active
involvement in democratic institutions.
Research by DICE shows that participation in TIE
programs results in positive changes in the democratic attitudes of young people. The research pointed
out that a sustainable project that carries on for an
extended period of time results in the biggest changes.
Sixty groups of young people of various ages from
marginalized backgrounds participated in TIE programs that investigated basic concepts of democracy
— including justice, freedom, responsibility, identity
and the important connection between self and society
— through stories that offered a structure to motivate
them to engage actively in their social surroundings.
They then worked on artistically linking these concepts to events around them, thus raising their social
awareness. This was done with the help of their school-
78 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
teachers, who were trained for this task before the
activity. The artwork gave both teachers and students
the opportunity for new forms of expression and also
made the school a place for social and political debate.
We offered the young people participating in the
project access to information through a website created specially for them. This raised their awareness of
democratic institutions, rights, and support agencies.
They were able to connect with others facing similar
difficulties, find the best support for their problems
and through the website’s forums of discussion.
Target Audience
Young people from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, marginalized Roma communities, and vulnerable young people who have already fallen into
the vicious cycle of crime participated in the project. Students from the Roma and Hungarian ethnic
minorities, mostly from economically disadvantaged
backgrounds, participated in the project in Serbia and
Slovakia. These young people have experiences that are
similar in some aspects to the theatre performances of
the TIE programs. This created the opportunity to examine fictional situations to which they can relate. The
programs created an opportunity for these young people
to participate actively, to take responsibility in understanding and solving the fictional situations, and to give
them the experience and the joy of making change.
Discrimination against women is fairly strong in the
region, and it is important to pay special attention to
their participation. We focus young people’s attention
on problematic aspects of how our society relates to
the question of gender. The portrayal of women in
the theatre is a powerful tool that we use so that the
gender focus is emphasized. We also worked with a
Girls’ Young Offenders Prison on this project. When
we are creating a new TIE program, our aim is to
map all the fields which could be related to the subject on which we are concentrating, but this time the
participants brought views which were new to us but
could be incorporated. This way we not only affected
them, but they affected us and our program. These
projects are highly valued by both the teachers and the
occupants of these institutions. We also empowered
these young women by sharing their insights on our
democracy with the public, who had the opportunity
to understand a different position through the artwork
coming from these particular young people.
We addressed marginalized young people who are
vulnerable for different reasons and also created a
virtual forum where they could share their questions
and answers with each other. We worked in economically disadvantaged areas because statistics show that
active democratic participation is visibly low in most
of these territories. Our project aims to give confidence, voice, and experience to the young people
from these areas, which together trigger their active
democratic participation.
Forty percent of the projects were implemented in
Slovakia and Serbia with marginalized ethnic minority children there. The problems and ideas expressed
by the young people across the region were brought
together at the end of the project, emphasizing the
necessity and importance of working across all sorts
of borders.
Specialists working with young people and art were
familiarized with all elements of the work at the three
full day trainings that disseminated our programs.
Methodology
The project toured three different TIE programs in
Hungary, Slovakia, and Serbia for marginalized and
ethnic minority children. Sixty interactive performances were held. Twelve half-day training courses were
conducted for the approximately 100 teachers working
with these young people across the region, and three
publications were distributed in 150 copies to support
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
79
the work of the teachers. Fellow artists, drama professionals and educators were invited to three events
— built around the three TIE programs — to share the
thinking behind the work and to offer elements or the
whole of the program as a model for further use and
development. Research by an independent specialist
investigated the effect of the project and shared the
findings of the mid-term analysis, which were used
to improve the activities in the program’s second
year.2 The final reports, notes, and recommendations
were published in journals for specialists in the field.
The work of the project participants was shared with
approximately 1500 visitors to the exhibition created
to celebrate their work and 750 copies were published
to give policy makers access to the findings.
Our mission is to give people the opportunity to realize
their responsibility to society, and through this realization, they will be able to build and live in an active
democracy. Our tool in this project is TIE. We find it
the most useful and effective method of work for these
aims. It uses the institution of theater, which itself
serves to build an active democracy by creating a space
in which students are not only viewers but participants.
Each program was constructed around one particular
problem such as identity, barriers, and injustice. These
are central problems in our society, and learning about
them — and more importantly, experiencing them
— leads to a better understanding about the relation
of the self and society. The play and the tasks are in
strong connection with each other, and neither would
function properly without the other. This way, everything they do becomes the part of the play, and the
play becomes part of their thinking.
In the first phase, we take the main problem and look
around it, and we break down the issue and explore
its parts. During this work we use methods of theater-making, drama, and pedagogy. This gives participants a deeper understanding of the subject, and while
creating the TIE program, our aim is to give the chance
for the participants to go through a similar exploration.
The very first step of creating a TIE program is to
specify the target audience’s age. Next, we determine
the appropriate subject and choose the play. There are
two ways in our work to create a TIE program. One
is to choose a subject such as injustice and let the
students improvise. We then brainstorm for several
weeks to create a storyline that includes parts for the
participants. This was the methodology used in creating Brotherhood. The other method is to choose a
written play and then pick out the main subject. This
was the method for Bonecage.
We decided that the age of the targeted audience would
be 13 to 15. Geoff Gillham’s Bonecage was intended
for young people, and it seemed to be written directly
for use in the TIE program because of its brevity. It is
only a 30 minute-long play, but it brings up a lot of
questions that can be explored with the participants.
While we are rehearsing the drama, we also concentrate on the subjects that are brought up by the drama.
This way we can find questions to ask the youth and
also the tasks which could be offered for the participants. This way the realization of the play also means
the realization of a whole TIE program.
The play explored not only identity through the three
roles but the students’ past, present and future. We
realized that the subject and this drama also needs
some preparation from the audience, so we attached a
short, thirty minute task using mainly the methods of
drama pedagogy in which we focus on “our cages,”
everyday life’s obstacles with which everyone deals.
After this, they can watch the play. After the play
comes the processing phase when the participants can
refill the observed scene with their life’s experiences,
such as we did in the preparing phase. When they
80 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
have a deeper knowledge of the whole scene, we offer
them to end the story with all the experiences in their
mind. This way this task is not only a reflective phase
but also a forwarding experience.
Challenges
This project’s risks were linked to possibilities of how
the teachers involved cooperate in the process. Their
full-hearted support and active participation were needed
for the project to have maximum effect. Unfortunately,
teachers themselves are extremely vulnerable to personal and social factors that may impact their work. We
remained in constant contact with them to be able to
give support as soon as obstacles confronted them.
We discovered that because of geographical distances
and teachers’ tight schedules, it is impossible to gather together teachers from different places. This led
to shifting from meeting all together to a three-hour
training session in each region. The training sessions
were shorter but focused directly on the specific
group. We held 24 three-hour sessions over two years.
Results
Follow-up material was developed before the touring
of each TIE program began, as they gave support in
continuing the specific work of the program. Adjusting
our plans to the needs of the teachers and the advice
from the designer, we published 500 folders and
published the materials for it separately. This way,
the materials could be adjusted to specific needs of
the teachers and placed into the folders. The website was launched in November 2008. Additionally,
a postcard-size leaflet with the webpage link was
distributed to all participants [1000 copies each for
three different TIE programs: Bone-cage reworked
September 2008 (Budapest, Hungary), Brothers created October 2008 (Dombóvár, Hungary); Eleven
Vests created October 2009 (Budapest, Hungary)].
Thirty-six groups were organized by the implementing
organization and 24 groups were organized by the two
partner organizations according to their knowledge of
local need. Sixty-two groups of marginalized young
people (1560 participants) of different age groups
took part in the three different TIE programs. Children
from the following towns in Hungary, Serbia, and
Slovakia participated: Bácsfeketehegy, Bácsgyulaf
alva, Bag, Bély, Budapest, Csallóközaranyos, Cse
pel, Dombóvár, Dunaszerdahely, Gödöllő, Gyömrő,
Győr, Kassa, Kishegyes, Kocsér, Komárom, Pécs
, Szabadka, Temerin, Zenta, The first program was
on November 10, 2008, and the last on May 21,
2010. A three-day exhibition was held in the Entrance
Hall of the largest Hungarian University (ELTE),
approximately 1500 visitors May 10-12, 2010. A n
independent qualitative research organization said:
“Kerekasztal’s TIE programs have a positive. Impact
on the democratic attitude of young participants.” 3
At least 3000 incidents of reflection on social problems
during different programs from marginalized participants.
Approximately 1.4 million people were reached
through the publications.
11 (national and local) print articles were published,
10 internet articles published, 1 national television
1 local television report, 5 radio stations (3 national
and 2 local) broadcast interviews and reports about
different events of the project.
(Endnotes)
1
For more information on DICE, please see: HYPERLINK
“http://www.dramanetwork.eu/” http://www.dramanetwork.eu/
Bori Fernezelyi and Luca Váradi, The Effects of the
Theatre in Education Programs of the Round Table
Association on the Democratic Attitudes of Marginalised
Young People. 2010.
2
3
Ibid., pp. 15.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
81
Promoting the Secrecy of the
Ballot in Kenya
By: Carla Chianese, Kenya
Identifying the Problem
The March 4, 2013, Kenyan general election attempted to ameliorate the fragile political environment that
followed the disputed 2007 general election, which
saw the disbandment of the Electoral Commission of
Kenya (ECK) and pervasive post-election violence
due to accusations of vote rigging and long-term foundational issues which remained unaddressed since
Kenya’s independence in 1963. Out of the vestiges
of the 2007 election arose a peace-brokered coalition
government, a new constitution, and a new devolved
governance structure that came into fruition with the
2013 general election. The increasing demand for
democracy and good governance in Kenya risked
being in vain if its citizenry remained marginalized
and politically illiterate. For the most part, a majority
of Kenyan citizens have limited capacity to participate
in democratic processes, which reduces their influence in governance and decision-making. With the
political instability of the 2008 post election crises at
the forefront of the 2013 elections, civil society, and
NGOs pursued civic education to enhance effective
democratic participation.
Objective
In the months leading up to the March 4 general
election, the Institute for Education in Democracy
(IED) implemented a project under its civic and voter
education program, titled, “Promoting Civil and Voter
Registration and the Secrecy of the Ballot among
Marginalised Communities in Kenya.” This project, funded by the Australian Government through
AusAID, aimed to extend democratic citizenship to
some of the most marginalized regions in Kenya by
meeting the following objectives:
• To empower marginalized communities in
north-eastern Kenya to understand their civic
rights and responsibilities, which will enable them
to make informed choices.
• To promote equal rights and participation of
minority groups through which the secrecy of the
ballot is protected.
• To enhance the capacity of community-based
organizations to promote democratic participation
within the scope of existing programs.
This case study will explore methodologies used to
protect the secrecy of the ballot amongst marginalised
sectors of north-eastern Kenya.
Target Audience
This project targeted representatives from community-based organizations in five counties: Garissa,
Isiolo, Marsabit, Mandera, and Wajir. Fifty representatives from each county were recruited to participate
in civic/voter educator (CVE) training. Although
training civic/voter educators was the primary goal
of the project, it was expected that the trainees utilize their networks at the grassroots to deliver civic
and voter education to marginalized sectors of their
communities to promote minority rights. In this context, marginalized groups include illiterate citizens,
women, and youth.
Methodology
IED recruited and trained 250 CVEs with the intention that they would reach 25,000 citizens in their
communities over a period of one month. CVEs were
expected to conduct two sessions per week in their
communities, targeting marginalized groups, with a
strong focus on protecting voter rights and promoting
82 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
citizens’ responsibilities. IED specifically engaged
with members of community-based organizations to
enhance their capacity at the grassroots to promote
equal and active citizenship and to utilize connections
from existing programs.
• X2 posters (voting procedures and the layout of a
polling station)
• Sample ballot papers
• Political party symbol handbook
Although a key component of the training focused
on the new positions in the election, legal framework, and voting processes and procedures, a strong
emphasis was placed on identifying communities’
needs, to which CVEs suggested risk mitigation
strategies and specific strategies for mobilization and
implementation.
This lesson plan is an outline of the IED training
course for CVEs. The following sessions were developed to ensure CVEs had the capacity to execute their
civic/voter engagement with the public.
Participants were asked to conduct a situation analysis to assess the communities’ needs. CVEs formed
small groups based on their constituencies in order
to outline issues and opportunities specific to their
communities. Each small group discussed the following:
Participants are to understand voting processes and
procedures for Election Day.
• Identify issues that may affect the secrecy of the
ballot in the constituency.
• Identify risk mitigation strategies that may promote voter privacy and equal participation.
Groups were asked to present their findings to the
class, after which the IED facilitators gave feedback
and identified thematic areas, target groups, sectoral
priorities and geographical scope. This provided a
link to sequential training sessions which came the
following day, which outlined methods by which
CVE’s engage marginalized groups, provided available culturally appropriate materials, served as a
forum for partnerships and linkages, and measured
the level of existing civic education capacity.
Illiteracy is a major risk to protecting the secrecy of
the ballot; therefore the program clearly outlined voters’ rights and responsibilities. Culturally appropriate
resources were developed in the form of:
Sample Lesson Plan
Session 5: Voting Processes
and Procedures
5.1 General Objectives
5.2 Specific Objectives
By the end of the session, participants should
be able to:
•
•
•
•
•
Explain the conduct of polling day.
Outline the voting process in chronological order.
Identify voter’s responsibilities and entitlements.
Demonstrate how to mark a ballot paper correctly.
Describe how the secrecy of the vote is protected
(assisted voting and identifying party symbols).
Session 6: Planning and organization of civic education activities
6.1 General Objectives
Participants will learn tips for planning and managing
civic education activities in their communities.
6.2 Specific Objectives
By the end of the session, participants should be able to:
• Develop a checklist and schedule for conducting a
civic education activity.
• Explain their role and what is expected of them in
a civic education activity.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
83
• Identify target groups for civic education needs.
• Lead a basic civic education activity.
Session 8: Participants’
Action Plans
Session 7: Methodology and
delivery techniques
Participants will understand their role in leading civic
education activities through their organizational work
plans using the civic education module on voter information.
7.1 General Objective
Participants will learn about varieties of civic education methodologies and approaches for different
audiences.
7.2 Specific Objectives
By the end of the session, participants should be able to:
• Identify different methods of conducting civic
education activities.
• Explain specific civic education techniques.
• Identify the difference between participatory methodologies and one way passage of information.
• Outline advantages and disadvantages of
each method.
CVEs used visual aids (voting procedure and polling place layout posters) to assist in the delivery of
their sessions. They also used sample ballot papers
and invited participants to practice marking them. In
addition, CVEs used a display book of party symbols
which were to appear on the ballot paper. CVEs familiarised the community with each party symbol so they
were able to determine identifying features of a ballot
paper and ensure that their ballot paper was being
marked correctly if they were an assisted voter.
8.1 General Objective
8.2 Specific Objectives
By the end of the session, participants should be able to:
• Draw up individual work plans to execute civic
education activities.
• Map out target districts and dates in their constituency for civic education activities.
CVEs were encouraged to plan civic/voter education sessions around existing activities within their
community based organisations. This collaborative
approach utilised existing networks, personal and
resources within their communities. The CVEs were
encouraged to incorporate a civic/voter education
session at the beginning or end of their planned
meeting.
One of the CVEs, Fatuma, shared her positive
experience:
CVEs performed role plays to deliver civic/voter
education to the community. CVEs used theatre to
demonstrate voting procedures and the layout of the
polling station. This method was particularly useful
when communicating with illiterate audiences.
84 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
“For my second session, I went to a market where
they sell miraa (a socially accepted stimulant that
you chew) and camel milk. Usually ladies sell
camel milk and men come to the market to buy it.
The crowd was a mixture of Borana and Somali
people, so I went with a translator to translate into
mother tongue for me. There were approximately
30 people there. I displayed the posters on the
wall behind me. At first, I didn’t think anyone
would be interested because usually people expect
educators to give them money for their time and
to receive information, so I wasn’t so optimistic.
However, they were very interested. I explained
how to mark a ballot paper, the colors that the ballot papers would be, and the six elective positions.
I especially talked to them about bringing a friend
or relative with them if they didn’t know how to
mark the ballot paper, or that expected mothers and
the elderly didn’t have to wait in the queue all day.
They were so grateful for the information and actually said that there should be more people like me.
They asked me so many questions and asked me to
repeat myself until they understood. Most people
were interested to see the voting procedure poster,
as they could understand it without any explanation
and also the sample ballot papers. Actually, they
asked me for all of the posters I had carried to take
back to their families to explain.”
Challenges
Designing and implementing a project within insecure
regions and with limited resources presented several
barriers; however, no more so than the rich cultural
and socio-political complexities that exist within each
county. For the purpose of this paper, challenges have
been broken down into thematic areas:
1. Electoral and political factors
Due to the transient electoral and political environment, there was frequent risk of change in legal
framework and electoral procedures and processes as
determined by the authorities. The Program Manager
had to ensure consistent and frequent information
was being delivered to CVEs at all times. Political
campaigning was also ongoing throughout the project
deployment phase, which posed risks of jeopardizing
the legitimacy of the ballot by providing inconsistent
information.
2. Perception
On February 14, 2013, the Program Manager
received a call from a CVE from Wajir county who
said that he was facing challenges around mobilization and the perception of the community.
Problem analysis:
The CVE advised that another civic education service
provider had previously conducted civic/voter education in his community in late 2012 and had offered
the community a “sitting allowance” (payment for
attendance). When approaching community members,
the CVE carried an IED handbook on voter education
that bore the logo of IED and another civic education
service provider. Community members accused the
CVE of working for the service provider who had previously paid a “sitting allowance” and therefore, were
withholding their “sitting allowance” from the CVEs.
They refused to cooperate because they believed that
he was able to provide a “sitting allowance” as previous civic educators under a different program had
done. The following concerns were expressed to the
Program Manager:
• In rural community villages, perception is significant, and once the community views the CVE as
having ulterior motives or as dishonest, they refuse
to cooperate, and therefore access is restricted. The
CVE expressed concern that he might encounter
difficulties mobilizing participants in the future.
The CVE was concerned that his reputation was
tarnished in his local community and that without
offering assistance “sitting allowance” to the participants, he would not be able to mobilize them.
The Program Manager advised him to reiterate that
he was contracted by IED to conduct voter education
in his constituency and that as a matter of policy,
IED does not offer “sitting allowances” for providing
public services. The Program Manager also offered
to speak to the chief of the community via telephone
to reiterate the contractual arrangements as a CVE
and to confirm what is and is not provided under this
arrangement.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
85
Recommendations
1. Identification
• Brand all CVEs with a t-shirt, cap and identification badge outlining the project, organization and
the donor.
• Prepare an “Introduction Letter” for CVEs to
distribute to communities that is signed by the
Executive Director.
In an attempt to harmonise civic/voter education
in north-eastern Kenya, the Program Manager had
requested a matrix from the Electoral Management
Body (EMB) after a consultative civic/voter education caucus meeting in February 2013, however, this
was not provided. This recommendation was added
to the overall analysis of civic/voter education and
provided to the EMB.
2. Technology
North-eastern Kenya has limited capacity for internet
and telephone coverage, which posed a barrier to the
frequency of communication and timeliness of reporting. To overcome this, IED used text messages as the
predominant mode of communication between CVEs
and developed a strategy for completing field activity
reports. Usually, field activity reports are completed
and submitted online; however, as this was not technologically possible, IED revised the field activity
report, printed sufficient copies, and distributed hard
copies at the workshop. Identified contact persons
were responsible for collecting field activity reports
from the cluster groups and returning the reports by
post to IED. During the announcement of the general
election results (which took seven days), bus services
did not operate in remote areas; therefore there was a
delay in returning reports to IED.
3. Safety and Security
North-eastern Kenya poses many security risks, from
terrorist attacks from the nearby Somali boarder, to
roadside bandits as well as inter-clan clashes and
conflicts over land and resources, therefore the safety
of 250 CVEs was highly prioritized, as well as the
facilitation and monitoring teams. After completing
a safety and security analysis of the five target counties, it was decided that training would be stationed
in Garissa and Isiolo counties, with all participants
travelling to those counties for an in-house, three-day
workshop. The poor quality of the roads also meant
that training was best convened in two counties rather
than five.
To ensure the safety and security of deployed
CVEs, IED developed a thorough communication
strategy whereby cluster groups were set up in
each county. Two contacts were selected from each
county and were responsible for communicating
frequently with 25 CVEs via phone and reported
to the Program Manager weekly. A procedure for
reporting such incidents was developed and outlined in the training.
4. Gender and Ethnicity
Traditionally, women have been excluded from democratic participation due to complex socio-political
and cultural tenets. IED endeavoured to recruit a
50:50 gender balance in the workshops but found it
challenging to engage enough women to meet this
quota. As a result, IED was not able to recruit an even
representation of women, though it seeks to achieve a
higher result in the future. Some women CVEs were
not able to enter communities without a male counterpart, therefore local CVEs often worked together
when a male counterpart was necessary. The same
issue was presented for opposing clans, where some
CVEs were not able to gain access to a particular
community due to ethnicity. This was overcome by
IED’s emphasis on recruiting a balanced geographical
and ethnic ratio, which was identified in the initial
program needs assessment.
86 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
5. Geography and Terrain
Four focus group discussions were conducted in four
constituencies to ascertain the level of knowledge,
change in perception and behavior of community
members who had attended a voter education session. The focus group discussions were specifically
designed to engage community members to determine
whether the following development outcomes were
achieved:
Results
1. Was there increased voter turnout?
2. Was there enhanced confidence of marginalized
communities in electoral processes?
3. Were there reduced incidences of unacceptable
ballot papers and electoral malpractices?
North-eastern Kenya is arid with limited and infrequent access to natural resources, road networks and
public services. Navigating this terrain requires local
knowledge and local language, so IED recruited several CVEs from each constituency and ward level to
ensure every corner of the county was reached. This
ensured a fair representation of clans.
CVEs completed self-assessments before and after the
activity to determine whether voters’ knowledge and
skill in electoral processes improved through the use
of civic education methodologies. The results were
analyzed against the following performance indicators:
• Was the capacity of CBOs strengthened to engage
citizens to promote electoral participation?
• Was there enhanced confidence in electoral processes?
• Are citizens empowered to actively participate in
democratic processes?
• Was there an increase in the number of women
and youth who voted in the 2013 general elections
in the target counties?
• Was there a reduction in the number of unacceptable ballot papers in the target counties?
This project facilitated a participatory development
process to enhance citizens’ feelings of ownership
of democratic processes and government legitimacy in some of the most challenging socio-political
and environmental regions. The dynamics of power
sharing changed the landscape of civic education
in north-eastern Kenya. In a region typically forgotten and left behind, the true essence of constitution-building and deepening democracy was experienced through this project.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
87
Human Rights and Citizenship in Lebanon
By: Hoda El Khatib Chalak, Lebanon
Background
Target Audience
Lebanon is a country ruled by what is known as consensual democracy. This type of democracy adopted
the principle of quotas among the sects and does
not fully realize democratic principles and concepts.
After several wars that divided the country, the
Lebanese population desires to live with equality
among all citizens and without discrimination. Until
now, consensual democracy has been unable to prevent conflict in Lebanon.
The direct target audience for the program is university students.
Problem
Lebanese youth have never fully experienced life
under a government that realizes democratic practices. Some do not even know how the mechanisms
of democracy work. Lebanese activists from all
backgrounds have long struggled to overcome sectarian divisions and to foster a strong civil society
that supports all Lebanese. As such, democracy is
one of the most important subjects that Lebanese
youth should study and learn. This education can
establish the knowledge needed for the process of
democratization.
Objective
Through the Human Rights and Citizenship course,
Saint–Joseph University launched an innovative program for university students with the goal of educating them on rights and democratic practices and
encouraging them to contribute to the social, political,
and economic development of Lebanon by participating in the process of transition toward a democratic
regime, according to international standards. The
objectives of the study are to enable the embrace of
pluralism in Lebanon and to overcome sectarian differences in order to build democracy. The indirect target audience for the program is the
university’s social environment.
Methodology
The Human Rights and Citizenship course consists
of a number of modules offered over a 24 hour period. The aim of the project is to overcome religious
divides and foster the emergence of a strong civil
society that includes and serves all Lebanese.
Some of the specific teaching tools used
to achieve the objective are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Brainstorming
Capacity building
The concept of leadership-networking
Developing democratic activities
Dialogue
Discussion
Exchanging experiences
Information
Mentoring
References
Reinforcing skills
Role playing
Teamwork and teambuilding
Step-by-step overview of how the course
is taught:
Step 1: Create a democratic and positive atmosphere during the course:
88 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
(a) T
he teacher starts by introducing himself or
herself as a teacher and as an activist in human
rights, citizenship, and democracy.
(b) T
he teacher asks the students to introduce
themselves and to write their first names on a
paper in front of them.
(c) D
uring the course, the teacher calls the students by their first names.
Step 2: How to start the course:
(a) T
he teacher asks the students what they expect
to learn from the course. He or she asks
that one student volunteer to write the other
students’ answers on the flipchart. When an
answer is not clear, the teacher helps the student to clarify his or her answer, for example
by saying “Please let me know if I understand
your answer correctly.”
(b) A
fter collecting all the answers, the teacher
asks the students to group the similar answers
using the same color marker.
(c) A
fter collecting different groups of answers,
the teacher can encourage the class. For example, the teacher can say: “You have very good
ideas about human rights and democracy.”
(d) T
he teacher guides the students to put the
answers in a useful framework for analysis.
choose one or two representatives. The teacher
chooses another student and asks him or her to
moderate the discussion between the representatives. The rest of the students play the role of the
audience and should express which team convinces them and why.
Step 5: Content of the course:
(a) I nformation: The teacher aims at fostering
the students’ role as important actors in their
country by informing them about their rights
and empowering them to defend their interests
in the sociopolitical arena by contributing to
dialogues between different communities.
(b) T
he teacher guides and connects the discussion’s results to democratic concepts. For
example, during the course the teacher should
implement a method of dialogue between the
students: to accept the opinions of others, right
to be different, tolerance, etc.
(c) T
he teacher selects from each discussion the
theme to be discussed next class.
Step 3: In this step the teacher asks, “What is
democracy, and why do we need it?”
(a) T
he teacher asks for answers from those students who do not frequently participate.
(b) O
ften, a brainstorming session starts spontaneously among the students.
(c) T
he teacher lets the students exchange different ideas and starts to turn this brainstorming
into a discussion.
(d) S
ometimes, the discussion may become intense
and aggressive; the teacher must allocate time
among students and organize the discussion.
Step 6: The course should be related to concrete
issues:
(a) E
xchange experiences: In the beginning of
each session, the teacher asks the students
to share with the class any events they have
experienced or thoughts they have had since
the last session (for example: in their friend
group, through TV news, etc.) that are related
to what they are discussing in the course. In
turn, the teacher shares with the students any
event he or she finds relevant to the course.
(b) T
he teacher and students should become a
unified team advocate to democracy by mentoring the student’s democratic activities.
Step 4: Encouraging teamwork:
• The teacher divides some students into two teams
with different opinions and asks each team to
Step 7: Themes that need to be raised during
the course:
(a) S
tudents should learn about issues related
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
89
to notions of difference, identity, belonging,
stereotypes, and discrimination and how to
address these issues through principles and
techniques such as dialogue, tolerance, diversity, pluralism, and conflict resolution.
(b) S
tudents also learn about teamwork and
teambuilding as well as how to exploit group
dynamics in a positive and productive way.
(c) S
tudents learn how to engage further in order
to overcome the sectarianism, racism, and
discrimination that are still predominant in
Lebanon.
Step 8: Tools used to show the differences between
democracy and other regimes:
(a) R
ole playing: The teacher asks one student
to play the role of a democratic candidate
presenting his or her program of candidature
in an election. Another student is asked to
play the role of a non-democratic candidate
presenting his or her program of candidature.
A third student is nominated to play the moderator. The teacher divides the other students
between the roles of audience and media. One
student should write all the remarks on the
flipchart.
(b) I nformation sharing: After the speeches of
the two candidates, the remarks of the audience, and the comments of the media, the
teacher presents the differences between the
democratic and non-democratic candidates
by talking about their speeches, and then
comments on the reaction of the audience
and the media.
(c) C
apacity building: The teacher asks the students to present spontaneous speeches focusing on various topics of democracy, some
chosen by the teacher, others referring to
the speakers’ interests. This exercise aims at
defending democracy as an activist.
(d) R
einforcing skills: This exercise also teaches
the students certain presentation skills such as
speaking without notes or trying to make use
of an expressive body language.
(e) C
oncept of leadership: During the course, students learn how to give feedback and to value
it as part of their strategy to improve their
skills as leaders of democracy.
(f) C
onflict resolution: During the discussions the
students are introduced to a variety of conflict
resolution techniques that are put to the test in
various interactive games, role plays, and scenarios.
(g) T
eambuilding: The students get to know each
other’s commonalities and differences and
exchange viewpoints concerning their common causes. During the class, several working
groups are formed to discuss different rights
and to decide on how to take action. The different groups then present their results which
are discussed together.
(h) N
etworking: Students decide how to network
to increase jointly their participation in implementing democracy in the Lebanese society.
Step 9: Ending the course by offering mentoring:
• The teacher concludes the course by expressing
his or her willingness to stay in touch with the
students when needed.
Skills learned during the course:
(a) S
tudents learned how to give feedback and
to value it as part of their strategy to improve
their skills as leaders of democracy.
(b) D
uring the discussions, the students were
introduced to a variety of conflict resolution
techniques that were put to the test in various
interactive games, role plays, and scenarios.
(c) T
he students got to know each other’s commonalities and differences and exchanged
viewpoints concerning their common causes.
(d) D
uring the class, several working groups were
90 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
formed to discuss different rights and to decide
on how to take action. The different groups then
presented their results, which were discussed
together.
(e) S
tudents decided how to network to jointly
increase their participation in implementing
democracy in the Lebanese society.
Challenges
Lebanon is a country hosting 18 different religious
communities. For 30 years, Lebanon has endured
various wars, which often involved a significant
religious component. Political parties, public institutions, the education system, and most aspects of life
are organized according to sectarianism, to the detriment of national unity and civil peace. Instability has
reigned. The various Lebanese communities do not
have enough trust in each other. Lebanese democratic
activists form a considerable part of the Lebanese
society, but until now they have not been able to create
an effective agent of change. Often, a Lebanese youth
from a particular community does not know enough
about the socio-cultural environment of other young
Lebanese from other communities. In this context,
educating students on the transition to democracy is
a real challenge. The most important challenge is to
transform the students’ ideas from sectarian affiliation
to democracy. The other challenge is to emphasize the
importance of education for democracy in the process
of democratization.
Results
• The students were introduced to the concept and
history of comprehensive democracy.
• Over the years, the number of students enrolling
in this course increased.
• The students were presented with secular events,
such as celebrating the international day of human
rights in their university.
• The students planned and organized projects and
events related to human rights, citizenship, and
democracy and established a new secular club at
the university.
• The students supported advocacy campaigns for
democracy launched by NGOs in civil society.
• Once this small, diverse group of students is
educated on democratic practices, they will share
knowledge with their peers.
• Many of the students become activists and members in NGOs that work on democracy issues.
• A remarkable number of students remain in contact with the teacher, exchange views among each
other, and collaborate in democratic activities.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
91
Academy of Political Education (Mongolia):
Education Methodology for Nomads
By: Damba Ganbat, Mongolia
Identifying the Problem
In 1990, when Mongolia began its transition to democracy, the country’s total population was 2,149,300
with 67.6 percent of the population residing in rural
areas. Of this group, 42 percent were nomadic herdsmen living in remote areas, where information access
was relatively limited. The sole means of information
dissemination was state-owned radio and television.
Founded in 1993, the Academy of Political Education
has since organized 6,500 training sessions for eight
target groups, in which around 130,000 citizens,
approximately 10 percent of Mongolian adult citizens, were involved. Most of the training sessions
were designed for nomadic herders.
Democracy education training for herders, who move
from one place to another in search of fresh pasture
and water, is distinct and requires special training
methods, approaches, structures, and efforts. Since
nomadic herdsmen live in the countryside without
any buildings, it is necessary to conduct training next
to the herdsman’s ger.1 Therefore, additional facilities
such as a vehicle equipped with training tools are
needed. Because the training is conducted in open
areas exposed to sun and wind, the training sessions
should not last for more than two hours.
citizens can ensure their rights.
3. To help citizens to understand their local administration and other public service organizations.
4. To provide knowledge on the distinctive functions
of citizens’ representation and administrative organizations established by local administrative elections.
Tools and supplies needed for training:
•
•
•
•
•
Handouts
Laptop computer
Portable writing board, pen and paper
Portable power generator Projector, screen
Tent, shade, portable chairs since training is
outdoors
• Other additional equipment such as audio
speakers, extension cord
Training components:
No.
Topic
Duration
Design
1
What are human rights
and freedom? What are
some principles of the
Constitution?
20
minutes
Lecture,
discussion
2
To whom should citizens
refer when their rights
are violated?
30
minutes
Opinion
listening,
discussion,
lecture
3
What are the local government and administrative institutions? What
are the main principles
of the Constitution and
other laws?
30
minutes
Lecture,
discussion
4
“Administrative institutions
and civil rights” movie
35
minutes
Movie discussion
5
Conclusion
10
minutes
Teacher’s
conclusion,
remarks
Target Audience
Nomadic herdsmen
Purpose of Training
1. To give a general understanding of the human
rights and freedoms specified in the Constitution of
Mongolia to the herdsmen and explain these concepts.
2. To provide information and knowledge on how
92 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Methodology
In order to provide more understandable and accessible training to the public, the training shall be
more participatory and discussion-oriented and shall
be applied to the local context. The reason is that
although nomadic herdsmen are literate, most have
only a secondary education. To conduct more productive training, teachers are required to obtain
information in advance on the Aimags2 and Soums3
where they are going to conduct training, such as the
results of the last local administrative elections.
Step 1: The first component gives an understanding
of human rights and freedom as specified in the
Constitution. The teacher begins by explaining
these concepts in terms of the local practice. For
example, the teacher starts the training by asking
questions such as: “How were the last elections
conducted in your Soum? Did you vote? What
kind of election materials and handouts did you
read?” and so on.
Step 2: After these questions, the teacher concentrates on human rights and freedom in
order to introduce the concept of democracy in Mongolia and the new democratic
Constitution. In doing so, the teacher presents
prepared slides showing the main differences between the current democratic society
and that of the former communist period.
For instance, participants compare an election
ballot from the communist period containing
only one candidate with a current democratic
multi-candidate ballot.
Step 3: In the second component, the teacher begins
by asking whether the participants have referred
to a particular organization when their rights
were violated. In many cases, there is at least
one person who has had such an experience. The
teacher asks that person to talk about his/her
experience. If there is no such person, the teacher will talk about his/her own prepared cases.
Step 4: Then, the teacher identifies the most common
issues for which a citizen refers to local government, administrative, and legal organizations. In
doing so, the teacher asks each participant and
writes down each issue they mention on the board.
Step 5: Based on the most repeated case, the teacher
talks about how citizens can protect their rights.
For example, the teacher explains how a citizen
will complain and to whom he/she will refer if his/
her governor imposes illegal charges or other issues
related to the illegal administrative acts.
Throughout the explanation, the teacher employs
methods to promote discussion. The teacher needs
to prepare carefully, since he/she will teach and
explain the procedures of how to protect legal rights
by using the examples of issues raised by the participants.
Step 6: The third component explains the local
administration, which is a new institution established after the democratic transition in Mongolia.
During the communist era, there was no such
structure. The teacher explains that this is a crucial
institution because the vast territory of Mongolia
is sparsely populated. The teacher also explains
that citizens have the opportunity to solve problems and address issues within their administrative units instead of going to the capital city,
which may be located several hundred kilometers
away. This is explained in the cases of problems
related to water, wells, and pasture, which are
more important to the herdsmen.
At the same time, the teacher will discuss the
importance of representative democracy and local
administrative elections in which people elect their
representatives.
Step 7: The distinction between the citizens’ representative council and administrative institutions will
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
93
be explained. In order to do so, the teacher should
know the names of the representatives of the
Aimag and Soum councils and governors. Based
on their cases, the teacher will explain the main
functions of these institutions and the differences
between them.
Step 8: After explaining the differences between
these institutions, the teacher will give information on what kind of issues that affect participants’ interests and rights are referred to the
above-mentioned institutions. For instance, in
order to talk about issues affecting the herdsmen,
it is important to begin by asking names of their
representatives in the local council.
Step 9: In the fourth component of the training,
the “Administrative institutions and civil rights”
movie will be presented.4 Re-focusing participants’ attention to the topic by showing a topic-related, short movie is useful for the people who
have the above-mentioned limited education.
Step 10: Before beginning this component, the teacher needs to prepare the training by dividing
the “Administrative institutions and civil rights”
movie into the following three parts:
Movie scene
Step 11: After watching the movie and discussing it
with the participants, the instructor will conclude
the training by assessing the experience. In order
to strenghthen understanding and knowledge
obtained from the training, we provide handouts
such as brochures and booklets after the training.
Handouts
The herders possibilities of getting books and newspapers are relatively limited, so they frequently use
and read handouts distributed after the training.
• Materials on human rights, freedom, human rights
organizations, local government, local administration, the courts, attorneys, claimants, respondents,
and plaintiffs are prepared by the Academy of
Political Education.
Results
• Basic knowledge on human rights will be enhanced
and understanding will be established.
• Gain knowledge on the structure of local governance additionally the purpose and role of concrete persons in charge and civil servants.
Issues raised
Information content
Part I
Violations:
Citizen Bold’s land is
illegally transferred to
citizen Jambal with the help
of a governor of the Soum.
- Where has the administrative violation occurred?
- What should citizen Bold
do?
- What is necessary to establish the
administrative court?
- What is the administrative act?
Part II
In this part, Mr. Bold
gets information on the
administrative court from
lawyer Jargal.
- What is the administrative
court?
- Who can refer to the administrative court?
- In what case can a citizen refer to the
administrative court?
- Plaintiff, respondent
Part III
In the conclusion part,
citizen Bold takes his land
back by applying to the
administrative court.
- What kind of decision does
the administrative court
take?
- Decision-making process of the
administrative court
- The administrative court’s practice of
solving administrative cases
- Additional information given by
instructor
94 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
• To understand the relevance of local elections
and incentivize and stimulate the participation in
them.
• To learn that corruption is a close threat that can
affect our community lives directly.
• To learn the significance of local meetings to discuss pressing issues. If issues arise, to learn whom
to contact and turn to at the local level.
(Endnotes)
1
Traditional nomadic structure for living.
2
n Aimag is an administrative unit in Mongolia, similar
A
to province. Currently, Mongolia consists of 21 Aimags.
3
Soum is a second level of administrative unit in Aimag.
A
The 21 Aimags of Mongolia are divided into 329 Soums.
4
he Academy of Political Education produced severT
al 25-30 minute movies for the purpose of training.
Depending on the training program and the target groups,
it is used in the training. Examples of the training movies
are available here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LvOUwujRmE&list=UU2wiOLqezwvAlAY4JfXtwRw&index=122
h t t p : / / w w w. y o u t u b e . c o m / w a t c h ? v = E d X 1 Y Q k g gTQ&list=UU2wiOLqezwvAlAY4JfXtwRw&index=120
h t t p : / / w w w . y o u t u b e . c o m /
watch?v=Vp-o6ZzRS3k&list=UU2wiOLqezwvAlAY4JfXtwRw&index=121
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
95
A Case Study on Democracy Education in
the Village of Pharsatikar, Nepal
By: Mukti Rijal, Nepal
Background
Nepal has gone through a period of political turbulence in the last decade and a half. Following the
end of a ten-year armed insurgency conducted by
the Maoists, a comprehensive peace agreement was
signed in November 2006, and an election to the
Constituent Assembly was held in 2008. The assembly worked for four years but failed to deliver a new
constitution due to political conflicts dictated by
positional bargaining among the major political parties. The assembly was recently dissolved. It is worth
noting that elections local governments have not been
held in Nepal in the last 15 years due to, among other
things, the political conflicts and instability within
the country.
Identifying the Problem
The local government institutions are run by appointees of the central bureaucracy. This has exacted a
heavy toll on democratic institutions at the local level.
As a result, not only is an accountability relationship
missing but local communities are denied services
as well. The marginalized and discriminated groups,
especially rural women in districts like Rupendehi
250 km west of Kathmandu, have suffered due to a
lack of services at the local level. They are not aware
of the benefits entitled to them from the central government and disbursed through local government. As
a result, social security benefits and other services
for widows and senior women, as well as stipendiary
benefits allocated to the female students are misused,
embezzled and not optimally distributed. Women in
the rural areas of Nepal are suppressed, shackled, and
subordinated due to patriarchal traditions and unjust
social relationships. Mostly male family members
exercise the decision making role and participate in
the public spaces where major decisions, including
decisions regarding public resource use and allocations, are made.
Objective
The Institute for Governance and Development (IGD)
is a national civil society organization working in the
areas of local governance and civic rights. It identified
some of the villages in the Rupendehi district, where
women’s conditions are poor. Women in these villages
are unable to raise their voices and exercise their freedom of action. The Pharsatikar Village Development
Committee is one of the places in which the IGD
worked together with local women’s groups and community citizen’s groups to enhance their knowledge
of democracy, civic rights, and local governance. In
turn, these efforts would enable women to stand up for
their democratic rights and engage with local service
providers to ensure the effective delivery of goods,
services, and entitlements.
Target Audience
The target audience of the citizen education program
included members of community citizen’s groups in
the village of Pharsatikar in Rupendhi district. The
participating women comprise a mix of social groups,
classes and castes. Altogether, 30 women were targeted as core members of a community citizen group.
They received democracy and civic education over a
period of two months.
Methodology
A democracy and civic education textbook was conceptualized and developed. The textbook, entitled
“Citizen and Citizen Pedagogy” (“NagrikShiksha” in
Nepali), was used as a reference for the democracy
96 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
and civic education program. The content included in
the textbook was simple and thus suited to the knowledge level and needs of the target group. The course
was based on a horizontal peer teaching-learning
strategy. First, intensive training was provided to five
local facilitators, selected from among the members
of the community-based citizen’s groups, who were
responsible for running a two-month-long course
on democracy and civic education. The facilitators
were semi-volunteers paid by the IGD through its
Decentralization for Inclusion and Peace Building
Project. Because the local women were busy with
domestic chores and household obligations, the classes met during flexible hours. In general, the classes
were held in the afternoon, usually between the hours
of 2 pm and 5 pm. Organizers’ houses with spacious
courtyards were used to host the classes.
The project contained the following steps:
Step 1: An Introduction to Nepal — Geography,
demography, culture, politics, history, etc. were
presented using charts and a map of Nepal.
Step 2: Key Aspects of the National Governance
System in Nepal
Using charts and diagrams, various state bodies and
mechanisms of governance were presented. These
included freedom, liberty, recurrent elections, the
rule of law, voting procedures and the importance of
local elections.
Step 3: Citizen and Citizenship
The rights, duties, and obligations of citizens were
explained through role-playing exercises. The purpose
of these exercises was to show the importance of citizenship to receiving public services and goods. In one such
exercise, a scene from the local government office was
enacted. Widows and senior women stand in a queue
to receive their social security benefits distributed by
the office. The officials only distribute the allowance
to those women who show their citizenship papers.
Women who do not have the required documents are
politely turned down. The moral of this exercise was to
show the importance of having citizenship documents
for one’s own identification in order to receive the social
security benefits provided by the government.
Step 4: Self-Governance and Decentralization
This step emphasized the importance and benefits of
decentralization and self-governance. For example,
this step explained how decentralization and self-governance can:
(a)Enable democratic participation of citizens
(b)Minimize local conflicts
(c) Increase transparency
(d)Protect rights and entitlements of citizens
(e) Maximize the use of local resources and capacity
Different forms and structures of Nepali government
were described and discussed with the participants,
including village governments in rural areas, municipal governments in urban areas, and district governments for coordination and linkage with the national
government.
Self-governance and decentralization were approached
through discussions and an exercise in which the participants were asked to throw small stones at a target.
If a stone is thrown from a shorter distance, it hits the
mark more easily. This was used to illustrate how the
self-governing system with decentralized government
maximizes the use of resources and promotes accountability and transparency because it is easier to scrutinize power from a closer proximity.
Step 5: Citizen Participation in Local Governance
Citizen participation fosters good governance and
democracy. Participation does not only mean consulting, but also taking an active role in decision
making, as well as producing and distributing goods
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
97
and services. In order to illustrate this idea, a mock
exercise was conducted. Participants were asked to
build a toy house using available local materials such
as mud, stones, and wood. First, each participant was
asked to share her views about the shape, size, and
architecture of the houses he or she would prefer. Once
the participants had agreed on a plan, each participant
volunteered to lay the stone, mud, and wood in order
to build the house according to the agreed-upon specifications. When it was finished, the participants were
told to pull the house down. The participants were
reluctant to destroy the toy house because it was their
own creation, and they had a sense of ownership for it.
The lesson of the exercise was that when every citizen
participates in the decision-making process of a project, he or she has a sense of ownership and puts his or
her best effort into making it a success.
Step 6: Civic Rights and Human Rights
The Nepalese constitution guarantees, among other
things, rights to equality, freedom, and information.
However, Nepalese citizens, especially in rural areas,
are not aware of their civic rights and entitlements. In
order to impart lessons about civic rights and human
freedoms, the rights of Nepali citizens were presented
in charts. Additionally, a mock exercise was conducted in order to expose the participants to the voting
experience and teach them about the electoral process. In the mock exercise, two participants declared
their candidacy for the presidency of the local ward
committee. The other participants were told to cast
their votes in favor of the candidate they preferred
through secret ballot, using two toy ballot boxes
placed side by side. The candidate who received the
most votes was declared the winner.
Step 7: Children’s Rights
Nepal has ratified the United Nations Convention
on the Rights of Child (1989) and has enacted laws
relating to children’s rights. A child has the right to
survive, to be protected, to develop, and to participate
in the processes that define, prioritize, and enhance
their rights and welfare. This lesson was delivered
using pictures, photographs, and information displayed in charts.
Step 8: Women’s Rights
Women’s rights are human rights. Women also enjoy
special rights through positive discrimination and
protection against domestic violence and sexual
harassment. Thirty-three percent of the seats in the
Nepalese parliament and local councils are reserved
for women. This lesson was delivered using pictures
and photographs.
Step 9: Good Governance
The rule of law, transparency, accountability, open
and corruption-free leadership, decentralization, and
participation are key elements of good governance.
To illustrate the concept of transparency, two plastic
bags—one dark and one transparent—were displayed
before the participants. Both of the bags were empty.
Everyone agreed that the transparent bag was empty.
However, no one could determine what was inside the
dark bag. Instead, the participants made guesses and
speculations about the contents. The exercise demonstrated that when actions and processes are transparent and open, there are few doubts, suspicions, and
accusations. A lack of transparency creates doubt and
suspicion and gives rise to conflict.
Step 10: Local Goods and Services Delivery Process
Education and health care benefits for the elderly
and widows are some of the services delivered to
citizens at the local level. The messages in regard
to local goods and services available at the local
level are provided in the citizen charters displayed
at the notice board of the office of the respective
service delivering agencies. However, most of the
elderly people and widows are not, in the case of
Pharsatikar Village, aware of the provisions and their
entitlements. The target groups are taught about the
98 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
importance of citizen charters with emphasis on
the need to consult them to know what services are
available and how they can be accessed. The Right
to Information Law and the Local Self-Governance
Law in Nepal are enacted to empower citizens to
use public goods and services and to engage with
service providers to get them in an effective and
responsive manner.
Step 11: Peace and Conflict
Conflicts arise due to incompatible goals and interests. In practice, this can take the form of misinformation, unjust distribution of resources, skewed opportunities, poor services, and discrimination. Although
many conflicts bring disaster and destruction, some
conflicts have positive results as well. Conflicts
should be addressed before they escalate and turn violent. This lesson was delivered through a role playing
exercise in order to demonstrate dispute resolution.
In the exercise, two participants pretended to quarrel
over a lost pen. They accused each other of taking
the pen and were ready to assault each other. Another
two participants acted as mediators and encouraged
them to discuss the issue peacefully. The participants
then settled the dispute over the lost pen. The exercise
taught the participants that discussion and dialogue
help settle disputes by fulfilling the parties’ interests
while preventing the conflict from turning violent.
Moreover, some of the notions of democracy and
civic rights are abstract, and it is difficult to make
them sufficiently concrete to be relatable to rural,
illiterate women.
Results
Democracy and citizen education classes were evaluated at objective and performance levels. The objective
of the classes was met because women felt empowered
by the information and knowledge imparted to them
through the classes. No independent external evaluation was conducted. Nevertheless, internal evaluation
at the project level indicated that community-based
citizens’ group members have contacted and visited
the offices of their service providers, demanded information, and engaged with the providers to obtain the
services they were due. Moreover, they have joined
in the initiatives for enhancing civic rights at the
local level. In particular, they have opposed violence
against women by, among other things, staging rallies
and organizing processions. They have also opposed
the dowry practices rampant in their local communities. Finally, they have succeeded in achieving the
allocation of 15 percent of the grants provided by the
central government for the welfare of women.
Challenges
It was difficult to motivate marginalized and discriminated groups to participate in the democracy and
citizen education classes. At least three out of thirty
participants dropped out, and a further five were not
regular attendees. Women are not encouraged by their
husbands and in-laws to participate in such classes.
Follow up coaching and support is needed, which
is very difficult to organize unless such activities
become part of the village government. Illiteracy and
backwardness is another impediment for these types
of classes, where no material benefits are provided.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
99
It’s All About Freedom
Jules Maaten, Philippines
Identifying the Problem
The It’s All About Freedom initiative is a branded
campaign for democracy (civic/political) education
that targets Filipino youth and activists in — and
potential supporters of — political parties and NGOs.
With a median age of 23.4, the Filipino population
is comparatively young. This generation is more
socially developed, enlightened, and engaged than
older ones, and mostly technologically savvy. Their
problem is that individual initiative is stifled by widespread corruption, red tape, and social control, resulting in a lack of initiative and often a failure to take
personal responsibility to improve their own, immediate environment. Many people look to local and
national authorities to improve their circumstances,
when they could already be working at it themselves.
Thus, the campaign capitalizes on programs that generate participation, connote sustainability and trigger
ripple effects. In addition, it aims to foster debate on
different issues related to the concept of freedom, to
identify social and legislative restraints on freedom,
and to develop and promote policies to enhance
political and economic freedom. The activities are
publicized through various networks both offline and
online. The most prominent parts of the campaign are
the so called “Freedom Runs.”
Objective
Transformational change through people empowerment is the brand of freedom that the Friedrich
Naumann Foundation Philippine Office promotes.
The guiding principle of each program in the It’s All
About Freedom campaign is to translate the complex concept of freedom into everyday language, thereby reaching new target groups,
in addition to existing ones. There is a need to
convert one’s freedom into personal empowerment,
and to instil into the value system the responsibility
that comes with civil liberties and human rights.
These programs contribute to making people aware of
their ability to build a more free society.
Target Audience
The It’s All About Freedom initiative targets Filipino
youth and activists in — and potential supporters of
— political parties and NGOs.
Methodology
Four major activities were launched in 2011:
• A “Freedom Run” that made anti-corruption advocacy “fashionable,” with more than 2,000 runners
in 2011 in Quezon City and more than 3000 in
2012 in Taytay, Rizal. Regional “Freedom Runs”
(in Quezon Province, Luzon, in Leyte, Visayas
and in Butuan, Mindanao) were also held in the
Spring of 2013, as well as a “Freedom Cup” football tournament with more than 600 players, with
runners and players wearing the popular “I Am
Free – from corruption”-shirts;
• The launch of “Ako’y Malaya” (I am free), a song
by the popular singer-songwriter Noel Cabangon,
to popularise freedom as a thought-provoking
issue;
• The Freedom Project, a contest that identifies
liberal best practices, with over fifty projects
from institutions, organizations, local councils
and ministries from across the country nominated
in 2011 and 2012. In each of those years, more
than 10,000 internet voters participated; and
• The Freedom Speech, an annual speech given
by a respected individual to analyse the state of
freedom in the country. The inaugural Freedom
Speech was given in 2011 by former Liberal Party
president (and current budget Secretary in the
Aquino administration) Florencio “Butch” Abad.
100 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
The second speech was given in 2012 by Election
Commissioner Grace Padaca.
Audio-visual productions, social media and the internet are used to broadcast these activities. To visualize
the campaign a mascot with a playful grin, called
Fredo, has been introduced. He derives his name
from the word “freedom,” and in Germany he would
be called Friedrich. Fredo wears an “I am free” shirt
as a call to be free from whatever prevents him and
his community from excelling. Fredo symbolizes
freedom to choose and to express oneself, and he is
a protagonist of freedom from corruption and from
poverty. He is also the main character in a short video
explaining the basics of classical liberalism.
The most eye-catching events have been the “Freedom
Runs,” two of which have been held in Metro Manila,
and three smaller ones in the provinces. A third one
will take place in Quezon City, Metro Manila, in
November 2013. Thousands of runners wear the “I
Am Free”-shirts, which were originally printed with
“I Am Free – from corruption,” and now also with “I
Am Free – My Vote Is Not For Sale” and with “I Am
Free – Kalikasan = Kalayaan” (Freedom=Nature).
This can be further expanded in any opportune way.
This is a branding of democracy education, edutainment cum mobilization.
The success of these projects motivated the Philippine
office to continue to improve them by involving more
partners--from public and private sectors, and from
international organizations including the Council
of Asian Liberals and Democrats (CALD) and the
Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe
(ALDE). These initiatives use top-down and bottom-up approaches, as they not only involve policy-makers and executives but also tap street bureaucrats, students, media and civil society groups. They
were designed so that the discussion of freedom can
be experiential and not merely theoretical, which also
proved to be more engaging and substantive. Because
many of these activities accommodate participants
from all over the country, they have a wider reach as
well.
The other popular event is the annual “Mabuhay
Germany” public market organized by the GermanPhilippine Chamber of Commerce. FNF Philippines
has a stall where thousands of passers-by participate
in games that promote discussion on the meaning of
freedom. At other events and debates, the participants
are invited to write their personal freedom messages
on a “Freedom Wall.”
Audio-visual presentations have been produced to
promote these programs, which have become an
attraction to participants in the “Freedom Runs,” as
well as an incentive for those who join The Freedom
Project because their own programs gain further visibility. The runners appear in a music video where they
enthusiastically show their support for anti-corruption
advocacy. At the same time, it demonstrates how
enjoyable the activity is, which in turn encourages
others to join future runs. Video documentation of
The Freedom Project had been successful as well,
with the selected projects using the material in their
own advertising efforts. The Liberal Party has been
using this video in its liberal democracy orientation
seminars too, to explain freedom in more practical terms. These videos are available on the internet
and are shared via social media.
Collaboration with private and public organizations
is growing, too. Media publicity has also intensified
over the past two years, with national broadsheets
printing news items on the activities of the FNF. The
Philippine Official Gazette has even carried stories
about It’s All About Freedom.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 101
Challenges
Results
Over the past two years, it has been a challenge to
maintain the novelty of the programs and to sustain
the interest of the public in the activities. The programs have to adapt to upcoming trends and to new
technologies. Given these requirements and considering the large target audience of the campaign, human
resources are often exhausted.
People call the office to inquire about future events,
which means that the activities make a dent in
terms of popularizing advocacy and enhancing the
Foundation’s profile. Politicians willingly host FNF
to conduct its programs in their constituencies, and
universities, student groups and other NGO readily
volunteer to be partners in the It’s All about Freedom
campaign. With this, the network for freedom and
democracy is expanded and strengthened.
These challenges are addressed through careful planning of activities, identifying objectives and expected
results early on, and proper scheduling of events.
Training sessions for staff are also organized to
upgrade their skills. As a result, they are able to produce electronic books (for tablets) and are currently
developing a digitized “Freedom Wall.”
While classroom discussion is essential, it is equally
important to bring the debate beyond lecture halls
and thereby involve a greater number of people. The
public shapes issues and influences the government’s
response on these issues. If citizens are aware of
their rights and roles, they become more demanding
toward their political leaders and more assertive of
their stake in governance.
It’s All About Freedom started out as experimental but
the people themselves livened up the campaign and
made it an integral part of FNF Philippines’ work. The
programs have to be constantly innovative, evolving,
and not limiting in terms of participation to sustain
people’s interest in the campaign. While activities
continuously develop, consistency in messaging must
be ensured to build brand recall. “I am free” has
achieved this as It’s All About Freedom’s slogan.
Further, the power of the internet and social media
must not be discounted as effective communication
tools.
The campaign theme It’s All About Freedom is echoing in FNF offices worldwide because it is simple
yet amply embraces the thrust of the Foundation.
Promotional materials (shirts, stickers) for “I am free”
are becoming prominent in the network.
There have been a number of requests from local
politicians and government agencies (for example,
from the Office of the Presidential Adviser on the
Peace Process and the Presidential Adviser for the
Environmental Protection) to co-organize Freedom
Runs in different parts of the country. There is also a
demand for video training sessions from youth groups
because they recognize the attractiveness and impact
of the videos of the Foundation, which they would
like to imitate.
The number of participants in the Freedom Run
increases every year. The actual number of attendees
also always exceeds the targeted figure. From a goal of
1000 participants, 1500 came in 2011. The following
year, the aim was 3000 attendees and more than that
was present. The same can be said with the number
of entries to The Freedom Project and the impact of
online voting. From 6000 online voters when The
Freedom Project was launched, the figure reached
10000 in the second year. Video views and Facebook
fan page likes are going up as well, which are empirical indicators of the success of the activities. Currently,
FNF Philippines fan page has over 6593 likes.
102 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Replicating the campaign is easy: what is crucial is
to identify a topic that would appeal to the public or
an issue they can relate to. The slogan “I am free”
is suitable for the promotion of individual freedom
and for linking this freedom to their responsibility as
members of their society.
More information about this initiative can be found at:
www.freedomrun.ph
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 103
Moot Court and Living Law
in St. Petersburg, Russia
By: Arkady Gutnikov, Russia
Identifying the Problem
Methodology
The transition from the authoritarian Soviet regime to
democracy is not a direct, one-way road. After just a
few years of more or less democratic elections in 19891990 and the first experience with democratic practices
after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991-1993,
Russian society still does not have a common vision
for the future and conflict between social groups has
become more divisive. There are no appropriate procedures through which to come to public agreement on
any serious topic: from minority rights to the structure
of government, from the relations in the federation to
the principles of foreign policy. Free and fair elections,
an independent judiciary and active citizen participation in local governments can create the ground for
a stable democratic future. But Russian citizens do
not have a clear understanding of the rule of law and
human rights, and they lack experience with and have
little training in participating in legal procedures. They
distrust the judiciary system and do not like to use law
to resolve social conflicts.
The first moot court competition for schoolchildren on
the topic “Tolerance and Human Rights” took place in
St. Petersburg at the St. Petersburg Institute of Law,
from December 2004 to March 2005. After that, the
regional moot court competition became annual with
the support of the Civitas-Russia Partnership, the
General Consulate of Great Britain in St. Petersburg,
and the Henry M. Jackson Foundation, in cooperation
with St. Petersburg Association of Juvenile Judges,
Center of Tolerance “Trust” of St.Petersburg State
University, Youth Human Rights Group, and Center
of Vocational Education “Ladoga.”
Objective
The program prepares students to use available legal
methods for conflict resolution by teaching them
basic skills such as case analysis, argumentation, and
public speaking to give them the ability to participate
in legal processes, applying rule of law and human
rights principles in practice.
Moot courts are organized by the Center of LawRelated and Civic Education “Living Law,” which
is part of the St. Petersburg Institute of Law. “Living
Law” is an original Russian program based on the
methodology of the well-known Street Law curriculum. In addition to the moot court program,
students and teachers participate in a wide range of
school projects organized by the Institute and partner
organizations: Law Olympiad, Debate Competitions,
Teachers’ Club, the Living Law/Street Law clinic
for law students, Theatre (art/social project), an
“Introduction into the Law” course, Amicus Curiae
Moot Court competition for law students, International
Human Rights Moot Court, trainings and internships.
Target Audience
There are several stages of the moot court
competition:
The main beneficiaries are students between 13 and
16 years old. Other groups involved in the program
include university students (law students and students of pedagogy), school teachers, and practicing
lawyers.
1. Developing case materials and testing (with law
students and teachers).
2. Teacher training.
3. The lessons in the school (conducted by a
104 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
teacher).
4. The school round (to select the school team
of 4-5 players; a teacher and/or law students
play judges).
5. The inter-school (quarter-final, semi-final) rounds
(take place at the schools, teams visit other
schools to play, law students, practicing lawyers
and teachers play judges).
6. The final round (which takes place in the
real Court Room with professional lawyers
and judges).
Model Lesson Plan:
Preparatory brief meeting (optional,
up to 15 minutes)
1. Brief explanation of the moot court goals,
structure and rules.
2. Completion of a questionnaire.
3. Homework: to read and analyze case materials.
Lesson 1 (90 minutes)
1. Focus: discussing short hypothetical/real
situations – 15 minutes
2. Describing learning outcomes – 2 minutes
3. Teacher’s input – introducing new information
(laws, international documents etc.) – 13 minutes
4. Case study – 20 minutes
5. Preparation for the hearing – 40 minutes
5.1. Explaining the task, overview of materials (10
minutes)
5.2. Giving roles, creating the teams and
assigning roles (5 minutes)
5.3. Preparation for the hearing (developing the
position and arguments) (25 minutes)
Lesson 1.1 (45 minutes, optional)
Training on legal argumentation,
evaluation criteria.
based
on
Lesson 2 (90 minutes)
1. Setting up the “court room” – 5 minutes
2. Teams’ final preparation – 10 minutes
3. Court hearing – 40 minutes
4. Debrief of the hearing (self-assessment, peer-evaluation and feedback from judges) – 15 minutes
5. Discussion on the case issues – 15 minutes
6. Final debrief on the topic – 5 minutes
Model Plan of the Moot Court Hearing (up
to 40 minutes):
1. The presiding judge opens the hearing: names the
case, introduces the panel, checks the presence of
the parties, briefly explains their rights and obligations. (2 minutes)
2. The presiding judge gives the floor for the first
side (applicant or prosecutor) for arguments. (5
minutes)
3. The presiding judge gives the floor for the second
side (government or defense lawyer) for arguments. (5 minutes)
4. Judges asks questions to both sides. (10 minutes)
5. The presiding judge gives the floor for the closing
arguments (rebuttal) for the first side (applicant or
prosecutor). (5 minutes)
6. The presiding judge gives the floor for the closing
arguments (rebuttal) for the second side (applicant
or prosecutor). (5 minutes)
7. Judges leaves the courtroom for the meeting (to
make assessment). (3 minutes)
8. The presiding judge announces the results of
assessment and all judges tell participants about
their opinions on the case. (5 minutes)
There are several modifications of the model moot
court hearing. For some cases, we have divided the
case into two separate issues (for example the issue of
“guilty or not guilty” and the issue “what should the
punishment be, if he/she is guilty”).
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 105
The team can consist of 3-5 members. The team could
be structured in several ways, for example:
Lawyer 1 - the team leader (lead counsel) introduces
the team members, to present the position,
to make a rebuttal
Lawyer 2 - the co-counsel presents arguments on
Issue 1
Lawyer 3 - the co-counsel presents arguments on
Issue 2
All of them can respond to judges’ questions. Or
Lawyer 4 only could be in charge of responses.
Lawyer 5 could be a reserve member (he/she can
come to the court room together with the team and be
ready to replace other member, if needed).
One of the most controversial cases used by the
program is related to the discrimination of women
in the labor market. A young woman applied to
the St. Petersburg subway system to be trained for
the position of subway train driver’s assistant. The
administration refused her application, based on the
provisions of the Russian Labor Code and the governmental decree that that lists professions prohibited
for women. The official goal of the regulation is to
protect women’s health. From another point of view,
this regulation limits the access of the women to wellpaid jobs and protects employers from the necessity to
improve the working conditions. Competing students
researched historical and comparative cases, referred
to international law and experts’ opinions, discussed
the conflict between traditional and modern understanding of the role of women in our society. The term
“discrimination” became less abstract for them when
they were working on a real case and finally met the
hero of this case — Ms. Anna Klevetz, who observed
the final round of the moot court and participated in a
discussion with the students.
The program organizers prepare a set of materials for
each moot court competition, including the Students’
Manual (with the case materials, instructions and evaluation criteria), and the Teachers’/Organizers’ Manual
(with lesson plans, instructions, evaluation forms, etc.).
The case materials include the fact pattern; the extracts
from laws; international documents; court decisions;
experts’ opinions; and other relevant information.
After the completion of the final moot court round,
organizers can give students the questionnaire again
to compare students’ knowledge of the legal system
before and after the moot court activity.
Another version of the moot court takes place in the
form of a festival — not a competition — to train
students and to show the results of training without
counting points and identifying the winners. There is
also a version that does not identify the winning team
but gives awards for “best lawyers” (for example, best
prosecutors, best defenders, best team leaders, etc.).
All students who participated in the moot court receive
certificates, and the best get special awards (usually,
books on human rights, biographies of famous human
right lawyers, CDs with law data-bases, etc.).
Challenges
One major challenge was a lack of knowledge of the
Russian legal system among teachers. Most history
and social science teachers in charge of law-related
education do not have specialized training in law or
human rights. They are often the main promoters of
stereotypes and legal cynicism. Many of them have
an authoritarian teaching style, acting as dictators
in classrooms. Many teachers promote nationalistic
post-imperial ideas, xenophobia, nostalgia for Sovietstyle authoritarianism, and skepticism of such “western” values as human rights. Additionally, they often
do not have enough time for in-service training. To
overcome these obstacles, we provide teachers with
106 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
extremely detailed step-by-step lesson plans and conduct preparation lessons, with teachers taking on the
role of students. It makes it easier for them to repeat
the same exercise with their students. Another method is to involve law practitioners (lawyers and law
students from legal clinics) as resource persons and
trainers. Lawyers and law students visit classrooms
and play the role of judges and observers to provide
feedback to students.
Second, the serious methodological challenge is the
need to create balanced cases with equal opportunities for both parties to develop legal arguments. In
the Russian tradition of law-related education, it is
unusual to deal with such controversial cases. This
practice comes from the general tradition of the
knowledge-oriented authoritarian pedagogy that gives
students tasks with only one right answer. Teachers
usually push students not to analyze the case deeply and develop their positions and arguments but
to find the “right” court decision. To overcome this
obstacle and to protect students from this influence,
we use real domestic and international court cases
with complicated legal issues, simplifying the factual
aspects (taking into account that in the moot court
students don’t present evidence but just argue their
positions). There should be cases that concern very
sensitive legal, political, and social issues. The case
should be in the focus of current public debates. If the
case includes unclear legal regulations or contradictory legal precedents, such as the occasional conflict
between the law and the constitution or the law and
the International Conventions (like ICCPR, ECHR,
etc.), it provides a better example for the students.
It’s important to develop a case that incorporates a
discussion of human rights and reflects the conflict
of values typical for a society in transition. Over the
course of program, we have developed cases on such
issues as: the right of Muslim girls to cover their hair
for a passport photo (Constitutional Court hearing);
punishment for hate speech, concerned migration,
in a newspaper (Criminal Court hearing); the rights
of women to be employed as subway conductors
(Supreme Court hearing); domestic regulation of public events (Administrative Court hearing); the right to
be registered with the Pirate Party for parliamentary
elections (Supreme Court hearing), among others.
To move the focus from determining the “right decision” to understanding the background of the problem
and measuring the quality of the argumentation, we
also do not reveal the results of the actual decision
during the moot court procedure. The judges evaluate
the arguments alone and give the feedback, with an
emphasis on the work of students. They can describe
decisions in similar cases but must concentrate on the
role of parties in establishing any court decision. Most
of the cases we used were in the process of appellation, cassation, or in the European Court of Human
Rights, so moot court judges could only give some
expectations, but not the final “right decision.”
Results
The feedback from participants (students and teachers) and outside experts showed that the moot court
program was successful. We use simple questionnaires and interview to evaluate the program. Each
element of the program is followed by a debrief with
self-assessment and peer-assessment. Judges, lawyers, human rights activists said that students demonstrated high motivation and good skills in arguing
their positions before the Moot Court. Aleksander
Shishlov, St. Petersburg City Ombudsman, said:
“Young people, who want to protect human rights in
the future, are the strategic intellectual resource of the
society. I believe that the experience of participation
in the Moot Courts will help competitors to become
qualified lawyers.” As Natalia Mikhalchenkova, High
School teacher from St. Petersburg, mentioned, “children are acquitted with legal profession and work of
judiciary system; they are taught to use legal mechanisms for human rights advocacy; they improve
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 107
analytical, public speech, teamwork skills; and teachers achieve goals of law-related education and professional orientation, get new teaching methods.”
Svetlana Larina, officer of the Kaliningrad Region
Ombudsman, focused on such learning outcomes as
“ability to participate in the civilized procedure of
dispute resolution, to analyze cases, and to be tolerant
and to respect people with different beliefs.”
Thousands of students from St. Petersburg have now
had experience with the moot court. They gained an
awareness of basic practical law and human rights.
They developed analytical and critical thinking skills,
honed their argumentation and public speaking abilities, and learned the value of teamwork and leadership.
Teachers began to use interactive methodology, like
case studies, PRES-formula (adopted from the original methodology of formulating a position in a
controversial case: Position, Reasons, Examples/
Explanation, Summary, developed by prof. David
McQuoid-Mason, University of Natal, Durban, South
Africa, for Street Law program), role plays, moot
courts in their regular classes.
Law students from legal clinics apply their experience
as moot court trainers and judges in their clinical
projects for schoolchildren and even for university
students.
Each year, some of the students — former participants — become trainers for new moot court teams.
They continue to participate in the moot courts and
other law-related projects as trainers, jurors, and other
participants.
The moot court methodology is distributed among
Russian regional law educators through seminars
with teachers. Now there are local moot courts in
Kaliningrad, Ryazan, and other regions.
The important follow-up result of the domestic moot
court competition is the participation of Russian
students in the International Moot Court competition (IMC), organized in 2012 in The Hague by the
Justice Resource Center of New York in cooperation
with the Department of Education of The Hague
mayor’s office. Student teams from Argentina, the
Netherlands, Poland, Russia, the United States, and
Venezuela modeled the International Criminal Court
hearing in English. As a result of this event, colleagues from St. Petersburg, Gdynia, and Warsaw
(Poland) organized the series of student exchanges
for the “Baltic Moot Court” in 2013. The second IMC
will take place in The Hague in 2014. The perspective
of participation in this prestigious international competition became additional motivation for students to
play local moot courts.
Each year, students and teachers from St. Petersburg
and Leningradskaya Oblast (two neighboring regions
of the Russian Federation) demonstrate their willingness to take part in the next moot court competition.
108 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
The “Projet d’Action Citoyenne” in Senegal
By: Boubacar Tall, Senegal
It has been noticed that Senegalese citizens do not
participate in public life in order to influence government decisions due to a lack of civic culture. Yet
they face so many public policy issues and, although
government is responsible for bringing solutions to
the issues, citizens also have their own responsibility
with regard to those issues. A good civic education
program was needed to change the situation.
The “Projet d’Action Citoyenne” (or PAC) is a curricular-based civic education program adapted from
“Project Citizen,” a Center for Civic Education program. It is aimed at middle school and high school
students, as well as community youth.
Objectives
PAC enables students to gain three major competencies:
• Social Cooperation: This competency refers to a
learning criteria related to the “common commitment
to a common life” and the need for cooperation with
other students in the pursuit of a common goal.
• Individual Autonomy: This competency develops critical thinking and the ability to distinguish
facts from fiction and indoctrination and propaganda from real life issues while remaining open
to others’ views.
• Public Participation: This competency refers
to the knowledge of symbols and functioning
mechanisms of institutions in a democratic republic and knowledge of citizens’ rights and obligations. It calls for direct and/or indirect participation in decision-making processes within the local
community, as well as nationally, regionally, and
internationally.
Methodology
The program uses the concept of public policy seen
as a concerted action of government and citizens in
order to find solutions to issues that people face. It is
implemented as follows:
Step 1: The teacher asks students to identify community public policy issues by listening to radio
stations, watching television broadcasts, reading
newspapers, interviewing their parents and the
community members, etc. Each student must
come to the classroom with identified problems.
Step 2: The students discuss these problems in class
and form research groups to get more information
about them. The teacher ensures that selected
problems are appropriate for the exercise by giving a lesson on public policy so that the students
understand the concept. Then, students select
one problem to be studied by all students either
through consensus or by voting.
Step 3: The teacher asks the students to collect information about the public policy issue selected by
the class and research groups are formed depending on availability of sources of information.
Students use the program’s pre-set questionnaires
and notebooks to record information and collect
data. Questionnaires are designed in such a way
that responses are collected about the causes and
consequences of the problem, as well as about
solutions that have been tried by the government, community associations, nongovernmental
organizations, other ideas given by community
members, etc.
Step 4: The teacher asks students to form portfolio
groups. There will be four portfolio groups:
• Group One’s task is to explain the problem,
its causes and consequences, why it is a public policy issue, and which government office
addresses it.
• Group Two’s task is to describe the public
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 109
policies that have been alternatively implemented by the government to tackle the problem. The group must identify the advantages
and disadvantages of each policy.
Group Three’s task is to develop a class public policy.
Group Four’s task is to design an action plan
that will facilitate the implementation of the
class policy.
small river. The water was soiled by animal excrement
and drinking such water caused health problems such
as diarrhea, dysentery and skin diseases. Therefore,
the principal was obliged to expose the water to the
sunlight and add some chemicals to make it drinkable.
The local government had begun the construction of a
water tower, but for unknown reasons, the work was
stopped. Students decided to address the problem of
inadequate drinkable water.
In order to facilitate the groups’ tasks, the teacher asks
students to share collected information, organized in
such a way that each of the portfolio groups will be in
possession of information related to its duty. There are
also some students who are representatives of their
groups to other groups to circulate the information.
There are many plenary sessions to harmonize the
class project.
The most important challenge they had to face was
building community support for their project. Many
people were not accustomed to seeing students conducting research within the community and did not
understand why the students were spending so much
time on the project.
•
•
When portfolios are completed, students rehearse for
the oral presentation of their work. Each portfolio
has a written declaration, along with illustrations and
art work to present ideas clearly in an attractive way.
Step 5: The students present their portfolios orally
before an audience of parents, community members, school authorities, and government officials
and elected bodies. A jury made of people from
the community presides over the presentation,
asks questions, and gives community members the
opportunity to ask questions as well.
Step 6: With the help of their teacher, the students
reflect on their work and draw lessons for their
next projects.
Challenges
Ross Bethio is a semi-rural city in the north of
Senegal. The middle school where the project was
implemented had no electricity and no tap water. The
school’s principal had to buy water from water sellers
that used donkeys to transport barrels of water from a
Fortunately, the Principal was very involved, and he
asked students to form small groups to go into the
village to explain the project to the head of the village,
the mosque imam, the traditional chiefs, and family
mothers. Inside the school, the Parents and Teachers
Organization was also informed. After receiving
approval from those important community members,
the students started to implement their project.
The students interviewed members of the community
and found that many people drank water from the river
with donkey-drawn barrels. Only some officials had tap
water at home. Their teacher, Fatou Faye, never expected that this preliminary portfolio survey would contribute to a protest march in the city! The students decided
by themselves to organize a peaceful protest. That
initiative was probably due to the political atmosphere
at that time: the country experienced its first alternation
of power since its independence, and it was common to
see that kind of event in the country!
The protest was another important challenge because
the local government representative was not informed
prior to the demonstration, and the middle school prin-
110 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
cipal had to inform him quickly, telling him that it was
nothing but a civic education lesson that had been too
successful. Local private radio journalists covered the
march, which was broadcast nationally.
Apart from that immediate impact, the project, both
during its implementation and during the portfolio
oral presentation ceremony, did have a real impact
on the community’s awareness of how citizens can
influence public policy decision-making. Both the
head of the village and the Imam testified about a
better knowledge of the issue, saying that they did
not know the water tower construction in Ross Bethio
was blocked because the contractor had misappropriated the funds.
Another challenge was related to the students’ access
to sources of information such as the internet and
libraries, which were not available in Ross Bethio.
However, those obstacles were overcome with the
help of the Health District officer, the government
representative himself, and many other officials who
helped students get information from their offices.
Some of the officials even volunteered to come to the
school to give talks to the students.
Students also had to make an oral presentation of their
portfolio in French, which is not the local language
but the official one taught in schools. They were not
accustomed to making speeches in French and in public. Additionally, community members are generally
illiterate. To overcome these obstacles, students had
to successfully:
Results
At the very beginning of its implementation in Ross
Bethio, PAC had an immediate impact in the school:
The students were concerned about the lack of electricity in the school. Head of State Abdoulaye Wade
had to pay a visit to the village during a trip to the
northern part of the country. To avoid another protest
by the students while the President was there, the local
government representative asked the electric company
to bring electricity to the school immediately.
Another result was the positive reaction of the government, in which a representative said that a new contractor was going to be hired to finish the water tower. The
water tower construction ended recently in 2010, and
the school was provided water the same year.
As a result, on one hand, the project has made a kind
of modernity within the school and the village at the
organizational level. On the other hand, the process
of implementation has shown that the students are
closely related to traditional values. That feeling was
linked to the contribution of traditional and religious
leaders to the success of the students’ endeavour.
The findings mentioned above derived from statements made by various stakeholders during the opening ceremony of portfolio oral presentations.
On the academic level, students who participated to
the project had in general, the best achievements.
• Rehearse their texts in French.
• Make role plays about the issue of drinkable water
in Wolof, the main Senegalese national language.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 111
Students Writing Their Own
School Constitution
By: Dejan Kokol, Slovenia
Identifying the Problem
Methodology
Citizens do not fully understand the meaning and role
of the state’s constitution — one of the key elements
of democracy — because they don’t recognize it as a
summary of founding principles, rules, and values of
democracy that regulates the functioning of a democratic
state and the life of its citizens. It is a founding document
in which citizens can learn about their rights, the state
structure and functioning, constitutionality, and laws, etc.
The proposed project was implemented with a group
of students, teachers and parents as an extracurricular activity. The exercise can also be adapted for the
classroom or as a school-wide project, working with
school parliament and school council, parents’ representatives, school authorities and representatives
from the local community. Depending on the project’s complexity, activities take approximately 12-13
school hours. It is recommended that the students
writing a class or school constitution possess some
basic knowledge of human rights and democracy. It
is important that the teacher realizes his or her role
as a facilitator and models democracy through participation in the classroom. Throughout the project,
they will understand the importance and role of this
document, and as a consequence, the necessity of
living by its contents.
Objective
To address this problem, I motivated the students
and teachers of our primary school (in a small
town called Gornja Radgona, which is located in
northeast Slovenia, bordering Austria) to write a
constitution for their class or school. Through the
process of writing their class or school constitution,
students learn about the content of a constitution, its
meaning for citizens, and its role in a democracy.
They also learn about and put into action those key
principles of democracy that establish rules for life
in democratic society. By doing so, they develop a
better understanding of the importance of the document in creating and sustaining democracy, increase
competence in democratic decision-making, and
realize the importance of including human rights in
the document.
Target Audience
The project’s target group included primary school
students aged 13-15, though depending on the project’s complexity, the project could include students
from secondary school or university. School teachers,
authorities and parents can also contribute.
Step 1: The content of the state constitution was
dealt with in the first three school hours. In order
to present and simplify more complex articles
in the constitution, I used an illustrated version
of constitution: Constitution in Comics.1 The
main characters, Miha and Maja, present selected
articles of the state constitution in a clear and
simple way, through examples using everyday
situations. During this stage, students learn about
the structure and functioning of the government,
human rights, basic principles of the democratic
decision-making process and related institutions,
the legal and social state and other practices. They
gain an insight into the content, complexity and
importance of the document for the democratic
state.
Step 2: (two school hours) Students compared ele-
112 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
ments of the state constitution with procedures
used in the school. In this activity, the teacher
used questions to direct students to compare and
contrast state structure and school structure, state
symbols and school symbols, the national anthem
and school anthem, the official language in the
state and in school, state territory and the school
environment, human rights and children’s (students’) rights and responsibilities, constitutionality and laws in state and in school, and procedures
to change the state constitution and school constitution. This activity helps students identify the
key elements that should be included in their own
class or school constitution.
Step 3: (two school hours) Students looked for appropriate documents about Slovenian laws that regulate the constitution clauses in the area of education that were discussed in the previous activity.
The teacher guided students and helped them
search for corresponding documents (acts and
rules on education, school rules, The Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, Convention on the
Rights of the Child, Act on Founding the School
Institution, rules on students’ rights and obligations in primary school, syllabus for the subject
of citizen and homeland education and ethics,
etc.) when needed. The teacher also reminded
the students to keep in mind elements of the
state constitution. The students recognized that
the school process is regulated by numerous and
complex documents and to make the work easier,
they prepared summaries to use when writing
their own articles.
Step 4: (three hours) Students were divided into work
groups. During this time, the work groups narrowed their study to just one field or one clause
of the constitution, choosing from general articles,
human rights, state structure, constitutionality and
lawfulness, or constitutional changes. They once
more read the selected articles from the state constitution and studied the documents that regulate these
topics in the school process. They suggested and
prepared articles for their class or school constitution. In this activity, the teacher reminded students
to bear in mind that their articles had to be based
on democratic principles, that they should be in
accordance with human and children’s rights, and
that they should be applied equally to all students.
Work groups drafted the articles and sent them to
the whole project group for adoption.
Step 5: The draft articles were then revised by all
project participants, who had the opportunity to
suggest and discuss possible changes.
Step 6: Finally, they voted on the articles.2 If the
majority of the present students voted for the article, it was adopted. The article could be rejected
with the possibility to amend it by once again
sending it to the work group, after which it could
be sent again for approval. At this stage, the objective was for students to learn and put into practice
the key principles of democracy by setting up
democratic rules or articles for the group, while
modeling democracy during the exercise. They
also realized the need to establish the rules one
needs for life in a democratic society.
Step 7: (one hour) Next, the group wrote the preamble
to the constitution. The students read the preamble
to the state constitution as a group, discussed it
with the teacher, and learned about the meaning of
its content. On the basis of what they read and the
discussion, the group prepared a draft of the preamble, in which they stated reasons for writing the
school or class constitution and listed its authors.
Step 8: (two hours) Students made decisions about the
articles that were previously rejected, rewritten by
the group and then sent back for approval. After
that, the project group (the whole class if working
on a class constitution or the school parliament
with the school board — representatives of teachers, parents and local community — in the case of
school constitution) could accept the constitution.
At that point, the class constitution came into force
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 113
as an internal document valid for all participants of
the school process.
Challenges
At the time of writing the constitution, I was faced
with several challenges and barriers. One of the challenges was to present the complex content of the state
constitution, its meaning, and its role to students of
this age group. Fortunately, not long before the project, an illustrated state constitution was published,
which made it much easier for students to relate to
the document. Students explored the role and meaning of the state constitution through the process of
writing their own constitution and by accepting and
promoting the rules and principles upon which the
documents are founded.
Another challenge was the need to focus only on the
most important documents, among the many that
regulate the school process, and to search for possible connections with the state constitution. At this
stage, students needed to be motivated to tackle the
large number of documents and information. It was
a challenge to incorporate a variety of ways to write
and approve articles on democratic principles, since
through the very process of writing the constitution,
the students developed and internalized the principles
and values. Composing the text of the constitution
regarding children’s (students’) rights was also a
challenge because students did not fully understand
the importance of ensuring equal rights for all. By
focusing on their rights, the students often forgot the
imminent connection of their rights to their obligations. It was necessary to explain and present the history and content of the most important international
documents in relation to human and children’s rights.
The aim is to learn the importance of the documents
and enable their subsequent acceptance of human and
children’s rights, not only for their own benefit but
the benefit of the whole group.
Results
The finished school constitution was the result of a
project through which students, teachers, parents, and
representatives of the local community could search
for information about general provisions of school,
school rules, students’ rights and obligations, rights
and obligations of other school process participants,
and school structure.3 The impact of the project and
the school constitution was positive. All participants
of the school process accepted the constitution.
The evaluation of the project was carried out in a
survey. Project participants and users of the constitution evaluated the content’s appropriateness, everyday
usage and role in developing education for democratic
citizenship and human rights. The evaluation of the
survey showed that the important articles — which
were included in the school constitution — are easier
to use when they can be found in just one document,
as opposed to many different documents. It showed
also that 82 percent of evaluated students consider the
school constitution as very usable in everyday school
life and that all of the teachers in our school think that
the school constitution can contribute to development
of EDC and HRE principles, help promote and internalize their values, and lead to better understanding
of the state constitution. The evaluation can further be
done every school day by observing students’ behavior
in relation to their promotion of democratic values and
human rights to the extent that they live by the articles
and values they included in the school constitution.
(Endnotes)
Ilustrirana Ustava Republike Slovenije. Accessed via:
http://www.dz-rs.si/wps/portal/Home/PoliticniSistem/
URS/UstavaVStripu
1
For example, in the case of writing a school constitution,
the voting could be done by the school parliament in cooperation with the school board.
2
Slovenian Constitution. Accessed via: http://587.gvs.
arnes.si/e-knjiga/Ustava.pdf
3
114 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Human Rights Education for People
Without Literacy: Training Trainers
in Southern Sudan
By: Nancy Flowers, South Sudan
Taking advantage of a lull in the decades-long civil
war in southern Sudan in the early 1990s, UNICEF
launched a project to train a team of local people to
do grassroots human rights education in this vast rural
area. Anticipating that this region would eventually
achieve some kind of independence from the Khartoum
government, UNICEF wanted to lay foundations for
democratic citizenship and an understanding of human
rights, especially those of children. In particular, they
wanted to address the rights of girls in southern Sudan,
the vast majority of whom never go to school and are
married before they leave childhood.
Brought into the project to prepare materials and plan
the training, I immediately encountered a major challenge: fewer than 40 percent of men and 10 percent of
women in southern Sudan could read or write.1 Most
familiar methodologies would not work in this situation, and typical leaning materials would be totally
ineffective where there was no electricity and where
insects and dampness destroy most paper documents.
I could find few resources on human rights education
for illiterate populations nor could I locate colleagues
with helpful experience.
However, I had the insights of Paolo Freire to guide
me.2 Especially important was his vision of learning as
an essential collaboration of teacher and students in the
process of “conscientization,” the development of a critical awareness of one’s social reality through reflection
and action. UNICEF wanted to convey specific content
about human rights to the trainees, but equally important was modeling learning in human rights. Trainees
would be asked to forego the familiar, traditional divide
between “informed” teacher, who imparted information
to “ignorant” students (what Freire called the “banking
method of education”). Instead they would be asked
enter into dialogue with participants as co-learners in a
democratic classroom, a cooperative activity involving
mutual respect, human rights principles, and a recognition of their shared roles as involved citizens building a
new, democratic society.
Objective
UNICEF put together a training team of Sudanese men
and women on their staff. However, identifying trainees with literacy in English or Arabic and the ability
to become grassroots educators in their region proved
difficult. Given how few women in southern Sudan
go to school, finding female participants was almost
impossible. Ultimately we succeeded in forming two
teams, one for a two-week training in the central city
of Rumbeck, the capital of Lakes State, and another far
south in Yambio in Western Equatoria State. Most of the
trainees were single young men, while the few women
were middle-aged widows, but everyone shared the
experience of years in refugee camps, where most had
received an elementary education. However, all had an
essential asset: they were locals who would be reaching
out to settlements in their home territory. For them this
training offered a rare opportunity to further their education and establish a working relationship with a UN
agency. Many traveled long distances to attend, one man
walking sixty miles through the bush.
Methodology
Since Arabic had been the official language of government and schools and English the language of
the refugee camps, we had anticipated an EnglishArabic training, challenging but doable. We had not
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 115
recognized the importance of trainees’ being able to
express themselves and develop their own trainings
in their home dialects. In Rumbeck that language was
Nuer and Dinka; in Zambio it was principally Zante.
However, as often happens where many languages
are spoken in the same area, most participants knew
a little of every local dialect. We developed a highly
participatory classroom with four blackboards: if
the presenter was speaking in Arabic, for example,
he would write a key term in Arabic while another
participant would write it in English, a third in Nuer,
and a fourth in Dinka, accompanied by considerable
debate about which was the right word. I was initially
impatient with this seeming waste of valuable time
— five minutes to find the right words for “equality
before the law” or “democratic process” — but after a
few days I realized that this process engaged everyone
in the room in genuine dialogue. By debating how to
express these sometimes-unfamiliar concepts, participants were consolidating their understanding and
finding examples from their own experience.
During the first mornings, we focused on the human
rights content while modeling facilitation and interactive techniques. Participants not only became skillful
at applying concepts to local conditions and attitudes,
but also grew conscious of the importance of the
learning process. For example, we often stopped
and asked about what had just happened: How many
people participated in the discussion? Who asked the
questions and who answered them? Did the facilitator
dominate the room and the chalkboard? Was the process democratic, with differences of opinion encouraged and respected?
Such critiquing did not come naturally to most participants, whose schooling had enforced obedience and
what Freire has called a “culture of silence.” As facilitators we encouraged a language of critique, modeling
constructive criticism and respectful disagreement.
At the end of each day, we gave out evaluation forms
asking for suggestions to improve our own performance, and consistently reported the next day on what
changes we were making in response. Repeatedly we
stressed and attempted to model the importance of a
democratic learning environment where everyone’s
rights were respected.
Likewise, a learning environment not controlled by
and centered on the teacher was a new experience for
participants, who had difficulty believing a truly democratic classroom was possible, much less effective.
We addressed this challenge by spending afternoons
of the first week demonstrating interactive methodologies such as role play, simulations, and different
forms of small group work, stressing the importance
of clear goals and instructions. Then we asked small
groups of participants to develop an activity using
those techniques to help people to understand a concept we had discussed earlier in the day, such as the
right to education or the best interest of the child. As
we sat outside around oil lanterns in the evening, each
group would lead the others through their activity,
followed by critique.
By the start of the second week, mornings continued
to be focused on human rights and democratic concepts, but afternoons were devoted to participants’
planning their own trainings. Working in teams of
four or five, based on their proximity of their home
towns and common dialects, they planned half-day
and full-day trainings that they were actually going
to present in nearby villages at the end of the week.
These real-life field tests added urgency to their work,
and they spent their evenings trying out presentations
and activities and getting feedback from colleagues.
As a dress rehearsal on the day before their presentations, each team presented their whole programme
to another team, who gave them feedback. The teams
then reversed roles.
The last day I attended as many of these village presen-
116 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
tations as possible. Typically, a group of fifty villagers
attended, mostly adult men and women, many of them
local leaders such as the priest, the town scribe, or the
school head. Both the trainers and I were delighted that
the villagers were curious, enthusiastic, and eager for
more, especially the women: “When are you coming
again?” After eight hours of facilitation the exhausted
trainers had to beg to be excused to go home.
another. Nondiscrimination, together with equality before the law and equal protection of the law,
forms a basic and general human rights principle.
Here, as an example, is a 90-minute activity on
discrimination against women developed by the
Rumbeck trainees. It requires neither literacy, electricity, nor any special materials. It proved an especially popular success, evoking both laughter and
serious discussion, with minimal presentation by the
trainer, and all its examples and analysis contributed
by participants themselves.
Step 2: Go through the list of suggested reasons for
discrimination and ask participants to give examples from their experience:
• Race?
• Color?
• Sex?
• Language?
• Birth?
• Religion?
• National or social origin?
• Property?
• Political or other opinion
• Other status?
Example Lesson: What Is
Discrimination and How Does
It Affect Our Lives?
To the Facilitator: Point out, if participants do not,
that children as well as women are among the groups
that most frequently experience discrimination.
[Materials: pieces of paper/cloth/stones in two colors
or marked with male and female symbols.]
Step 1: Presentation/Discussion:
What Is Discrimination? (15 minutes)
Explain that the word “discrimination” is used in
many human rights conventions with a consistent
and specific meaning. Human rights law uses the
term “discrimination” to mean “any distinction,
exclusion, restriction or preference” for any reason. It then goes on to gives examples of such
reasons: “race, color, sex, language, religion,
political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.” The effects
of discrimination are to limit “the recognition,
enjoyment or exercise of all persons, on an equal
footing, of all rights and freedoms.”
Simply put, discrimination occurs when one person enjoys greater or lesser human rights than
Step 3: Small-Group Activity: Born Equal?
(10 minutes)
• Divide participants into small groups. Ask half
the groups to think of as many advantages and
disadvantages of being a female as they can.
Ask the other half to do the same for males.
• Ask each small group to combine with another that had the same assignment. They should
1) compare their lists; 2) decide on five of
the most important items in each category 3)
rate each item on a scale of 1-5 based on how
important each advantage or disadvantage
is to the life of an individual. For example,
something trivial like “Wearing attractive
clothing” might be rated a “1” while “Not get
as much food” might receive a “5.”
To the Facilitator: With a mixed group of participants, you might make all-male and all-female groups.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 117
Ask some single-sex groups to deal with the advantages and disadvantages of their own sex and others with
those of the opposite sex. This variation emphasizes the
difference in male and female perspectives.
To the Facilitator: Ask questions like:
•
•
Step 4: Full-Group Activity:
Born Equal? (25 minutes)
• Draw a line on the ground. Ask everyone to
put his or her toes on the line and explain
that line represents their birthday. Explain
that all the participants are babies born on
the same day and according to the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights they are “born
free and equal in dignity and rights.”
• Observe that unfortunately some members of
the community are not really “equal in rights
and dignity.” Ask each participant to draw a
piece of paper with a male or female sign or
in some other way randomly to assign male
and female roles.
• Ask a volunteer to mention an important
male advantage identified by the group and
how many points it was given. Then ask all
those designated “males” to advance that
many steps forward from the line. Next ask
for a female advantage and its rating and ask
all the designated “females” to step forward
accordingly.
• Continue in this same manner with participants stepping forward for advantages and
backward for disadvantages according to the
rating given. Alternate between male and
female, advantages and disadvantages.
• When participants are far apart, with the
“females” far behind the “males,” ask participants to turn and face each other. Move
among the two groups asking questions of
several individuals from each group, especially males designated “females” for this
exercise and vice versa.
•
How do you feel about your “position”?
What do you want to say to those in the
other group?
H
ow would you feel if you were in the
other group?
Step 5: Full-Group Discussion:
Analyzing Discrimination (30 minutes)
Use the activity “Born Equal?” as an introduction
to a discussion of discrimination. Ask participants
to restate some of the major advantages and disadvantages mentioned in the exercise. Ask which of
these advantages or disadvantages lead to serious
discrimination that limits women’s human rights.
Explain that international human rights law (esp.
CEDAW) outlines some very specific sources of
discrimination, including law, customs, and practices that discriminate.
To the Facilitator:
1. You might read articles of CEDAW that address
the most serious forms of discrimination mentioned.
2. You might discuss some of these topics:
• Which forms of discrimination do you think
can be changed? How?
• Are there forms of discrimination that you
don’t think can be changed? Why not?
• Who benefits from discrimination?
• Who imposes or reinforces the practices that
continue discrimination?
3. You might use a role-play here, showing a “before”
and “after” sequence with examples of discrimination. The ”after” version would illustrate a case
where the discrimination no longer exists.
4. You might also use an “Effects Web” here with
the central statements derived from participants’
examples or their opposite. For example, “Women
118 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
and girls receive as much food/education as men
and boys.”
(Endnotes)
1
Step 6: Closing (5 minutes)
1. Review the main points of this session:
• The kinds of discrimination that make men
and women’s lives and human rights unequal.
• The effects of this inequality on women
and girls.
2. Thank participants for their contributions.
Gender Concerns International, “Women in South Sudan.”
Accessed
via;
http://www.genderconcerns.org/images/gal/
Women%20in%20South%20Sudan.pdf
2
Paolo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Herder
and Herder. 1970.
3
Paolo Freire, Pedagogy of Freedom: Ethics, Democracy and
Civic Courage. Lathan: Rowan & Littlefield. 1998. pp. 31.
Results
I wish I could conclude with a report on the success of
these grassroots trainers for human rights and democracy in the villages of southern Sudan, but sadly the
truce that had made this project possible came to
an abrupt end. Bombing resumed in Rumbeck and
Yambio, and another violent phrase in the civil war
broke out, forcing not only me but also UNICEF
to withdraw. Ultimately, of course, South Sudan
achieved nationhood in 2011.
Although I can only hope that these trainings will have
some influence in the lives of the participants, they
were surely of immense value for me. I had repeatedly
to confront my misconceptions about working with
illiterate populations. I learned the immense power of
storytelling for all people. And the importance of trainers’ developing their own strategies and presentations.
Most important, this southern Sudan experience underscored for me both the difficulty and the importance
of inspiring in trainers a commitment to democratic,
non-authoritarian learning that respects and builds on
the experience of the participants and in which teacher
and learner are engaged in genuine dialogue. As Freire
has put it, “There is, in fact, no teaching without learning. One requires the other … Whoever teaches learns
in the act of teaching, and whoever learns teaches in the
act of learning.”3
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 119
Future Search – “Dream Thailand”
By: Rainer Adam, Pimrapaat Dusadeeisariyakul,
and Ben Fourniotis, Thailand
Identifying the Problem
Opinion surveys show that in Thailand, the young
generation’s interest in politics is almost non-existent. Youth and young adults are usually significantly
underrepresented in democratic institutions (parliament, senate and political parties), and their voices are
largely unheard in Thai society.
Together with its partner organizations in Thailand, the
Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom conceptualized the original campaign in order to reach out to
Thailand’s young generation to ascertain their views on
the future of their country. The results are then used
to make political parties and political decision-makers
aware of the lack of youth participation, and show society would benefit from more youth inclusiveness.
The “Dream Thailand” campaign targets young university students and is based on the well-known
“future search” methodology. As we learned through
experimentation, “Dream Thailand” can be applied to
a large variety of contexts. The Friedrich Naumann
Foundation and its partners in Thailand believe that
the current young generation is the future of the country and believe their voices need to be heard, prepared
this new campaign. The seven “Dream Thailand”
sessions concluded with an exhibition in Bangkok in
2012 and a summary of the results was presented to
political decision-makers in the capital.
Objective
“Dream Thailand” events provide a platform for youth
to voice their visions, opinions and recommendations
about the Thailand of their dreams, the Thailand
they want to live in. Furthermore, the Foundation
wanted to make political parties and decision-makers
in government and opposition aware of the deficiencies in youth participation in politics in general, and
encourage political decision-makers to reach out to
the young generation.
Target Audience
The first “Dream Thailand” campaign involved about
1,400 young students between 19 and 22 years old
from 8 provinces in 6 regions of Thailand, participating in shaping the future of the country. The majority
of participants were recommended by university lecturers and university students made up the majority of
participants. All faculties were represented. “Dream
Thailand” was also open to the public, and there were
other, non-university going participants involved.
Pamphlets, small reports, Power Point presentations
and documentary films have been made and syndicated explaining the projects initial aims and its results.
The results were presented to political decision-makers in government and opposition as well as to the
general public to show that youths have an interest in
increasing their political involvement.
Methodology
The concept of “Dream Thailand” is based on a
renowned methodology called “Future Search.” It
progresses through three steps: the dream phase, the
“reality check” phase (what holds us back) and the
formulation of concrete actions (what do we want
decision-makers to do, what do we want to invest
ourselves). The participants were asked to visualize
the current political, societal, economic and cultural
situation. Subsequently, they wrote down their personal wishes for the development of Thailand over
the next ten years.
120 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
The facilitators set the stage by posing the question:
“What does Thailand look like in your dreams?” As
a logical consequence, the second step and follow-up
question asked what changes should be demanded
from politic institutions and society at large. The students’ wishes were then categorized and the concise
results of this brainstorming session were presented
to the group. Overcoming initial caution, the participants soon began making engaged and inspiring contributions. The last step was to identify certain areas
(such as conflict resolution, advances in education,
social unity has increased cohesiveness) in which the
young people wanted to be involved in order to translate their dreams into reality.
Participants followed these steps:
(a)
Participants sat in a circle or half circle and
are given two pieces of paper.
(b)
A video clip was shown to inspire participants
to reflect on different issues. The video involved
snippets of recordings of random people in society replying to the question “what is your dream
for Thailand in the next 10 years?”
(c)
For 5 minutes participants reflected on the
reality of Thailand and imagined Thailand
over the next 10 years.
(d)
Participants wrote their “‘dream”’ on one piece
of note paper and wrote their ideas about
achieving those objectives on another piece.
(e)
The notes are grouped into 5 topic sections;
politics, economics, society and culture, education, and technology/media/environment
and displayed on a board.
(f)
Facilitators identify outstanding and relevant
comments and lead discussion sessions on
aims and potential processes that needed to
be in place to realize the dreams.
Challenges
barriers, or obstacles in conducting the campaign.
This was in part due to the help provided by the
programs implementing partners. The major partners
were Bangkok Arts and Culture Centre, Thai PBS,
Asian Knowledge Institute, Happening Magazine,
Future Thai Leaders, Mahidol University, and the
Election Commission of Thailand.
However, the follow-up posed two serious challenges.
First, it is difficult to get people to stay engaged and
motivated for a long period of time, especially when
the subsequent phrase focuses on hard issues, such as
equality of opportunity, good governance, decentralization and peace. The aspirations of the participants
need to be channeled into political action. In case no
political player (a party or a movement) wants to take
up the challenge, the participants themselves need to
consider starting a movement to fight for their interests.
A second challenge is that the demands and proposed
solutions of the participants need to be substantiated by reliable information and the kind of advice
that only subject matter specialists can provide. The
Foundation is currently organizing a second round of
subject matter consultations in the main policy areas
identified by the “Dream Thailand” participants.
Results
Some of the participants remained active in politics
and advocacy post their experience with “Dream
Thailand.” Some participants attended succeeding
seminars, while others are collaborating with The
Foundation’s partners to contribute to public discourse and realize their dreams for Thailand. As a
result of the “Dream South” program, for example,
some participants were able to receive funding from
the Southern Border Provinces Administrative Center
to carry out further projects, such as documentary
making.
The Foundation did not face any major challenges,
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 121
Since “Dream Thailand” offers flexible, far reaching
opportunities, we had to attend to the diverse foci of
each region. For example, the struggle for identity
and national security was a major issue in Songkhla,
a southern province with a large Muslim population.
In other provinces such as Chonburi, Chiang Mai or
Nakhonpanom, Thailand’s circumstances were compared to similar issues in other nations. For example,
students wished for a Thai educational system that
would be equal to those in Europe or the United States.
An interesting topic addressed in many provinces concerned the hierarchical system. Hierarchical
structures are found everywhere in Thai society.
For example, it is obligatory to be very respectful
towards people with higher social status, because
of their age, rank or wealth. While this system has
rarely been questioned in the past, it is increasingly
viewed by young people as limiting their personal
freedom and as a factor contributing to the increase
of social inequalities. In this context, the necessity of
paying respect to persons deemed superior (especially
because of seniority within the system) without any
action to merit respect, was questioned.
Inequalities were found at several levels. Regional
inequalities in educational opportunities and livelihoods were noted. Other students commented on the
issue of inequality and referred to the lack of rule of
law, access to justice and wished for every individual
to be treated equally by the judiciary.
Some wishes were repeated across many levels and
seemed to be agreed on by most participants. This
was the case for the issue of internal unity. “I want
Thai people to love each other” was probably the
most prevalent wish voiced throughout all the events.
Engaged reflections addressed a range of positions.
“Is it necessary for a healthy society to be built on
love or does the wish for positive feelings between
people only means that we listen with respect to each
other’s opinions?” “Should we try to realize that different people have different views and that in order
to get along with each other one needs to respect the
others’ views as equally legitimate as one’s own?”
The outcomes of the “Dream Thailand” campaign
roadshow were summarized and put together in the
form of an exhibition and a documentary film, which
received a great deal of attention from both the media
and the general public. The documentary was repeatedly aired nationwide by public TV (Thai PBS), and
participants were interviewed on a live show about
“Dream Thailand.”
The stimulating and far-reaching collection of ideas
and proposals offered by the participants was exhibited at the Bangkok Art and Culture Center in October
2012, in three separate parts: Dream, Reality and
Future Planning. The first part presented the participants’ major issues collected from the dreams
throughout the event series. A collection of over 1200
post-it notes on which the students were asked to
write down their wishes formed a vivid part of the
exhibition. The second part allowed the visitors to
visualize reality. Most dreams were linked to the real
circumstances fundamental for the imagination of a
better situation. This idea of change will finally be
used to formulate concrete ideas on how to achieve
the dreams that improve reality. Visitors were invited
to contribute their own dreams and visions at the exhibition and responded enthusiastically.
Feedback Session –
Documentary Screening
Forming an important part of the feedback session,
each venue holding the “Dream Thailand” workshop
in 2012 screened the “Dream Thailand” documentary.
The collection of thoughts and wishes about Thailand
in the next decade reflected what the participants
shared in their interactive workshops. Almost all participants agreed that the results did reflect their dreams
122 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
about their country in the future. The screening of the
“Dream Thailand” documentary has exposed many
young people to other people and linked their aspirations across different parts of the country.
Follow-up and Replication
cess feel empowered. They realize that their dreams
for the country as a whole or in part are shared by
others. They understand that their voices are listened
to by the authorities and their initiatives will be supported.
The above-mentioned activities in the framework
of the “Dream Thailand” campaign have led to
demands from other stakeholders and organizations
for the “Dream Thailand” approach. Subsequently the
Foundation was invited to apply the methodology in
the following contexts:
In conclusion, it was found that the process is easy to
replicate elsewhere. The initiative can easily be transferred to other places, situations and countries, other
levels of governance, by simply asking forward-looking questions to participants to plan or design the
future of organisations, communities or a country.
Dream Bangkok
Media Coverage
In the run-up to the Bangkok Governor election,
the Democrat Party used the summary report of
the “Dream Thailand” project in its campaign for a
liveable capital. The project has inspired not only a
political party but the media and the general public to
demand change.
The results were published in TV and radio programs, newspapers, as well as frequent updates on the
“Dream Thailand” Facebook page.
Dream East
The Senate Sub-Committee on People’s Network, with
the help of FNF, conducted a replication on the “Dream
Thailand” initiative in the Eastern region, calling it
“Dream East.” Civil society organisations and government agencies came together to develop a plan for the
Eastern region over the next 10 years. The Senate SubCommittee helped build a bridge between civil society
organisations and government agencies.
Dream South
The Southern Border Provinces Administrative
Centre, with the help of the FNF, conducted a replication renamed “Dream South,” which enabled young
people in the Deep South to come up with possible
solutions in the form of project proposals.
The success of the campaign motivated more Thai
youth to participate in the process of change. Those
students or participants who have been part of the pro-
“Dream Thailand”- Documentary was screened for
the first time in the Hot Short Film program on
ThaiPBS channel at 23:00 on 11 October 2012.
It was also screened at the film and music festival
“happening@house*3” at House RCA on 13 October
2012 at 12:00 for the first screen and 21:00 for the
second.
“Dream Thailand”- exhibition and workshop was
reported by several news agencies including Khaosod,
Matichon, Kapook, RYT9, Than Online, Kom Chad
Leuk, etc.
TV interviews by ThaiPBS, Bluesky Channel, Social
Café program, and Khon Thai Mai Ting Kan program
“Dream Thailand” - Documentary, with English
subtitles, can be watched on youtube channel “Asia
Freedom TV” or visit our Facebook page “DreamThailand” for more information.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 123
Links:
h t t p s : / / w w w. f a c e b o o k . c o m / p a g e s / D r e a m Thailand/475198242493065
http://www.fnfasia.org/index.php?option=com_con
tent&view=article&id=1600:introducing-simdemocracy-&catid=3:latest-news
http://www.fnfasia.org/index.php?option=com_
content&view=article&id=1537:sim-democracyboard-game-edutainment&catid=3:latest-news
http://www.fnfasia.org/index.php?option=com_
content&view=article&id=1587:sim-democracyunderstanding-democracy-in-a-playfulway&catid=3:latest-news
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8UlwEmG_
SY&list=PLnxVznfbsHVUzw2eqRHNrCBywDgIOO_p
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ODy9v3
M m d Q & l i s t = P L n x V z n f b s H V U z w 2 e q R H N rCBywDgIOO_p
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_
embedded&v=sZwIxW1A0uY#at=18
124 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
SIM-Democracy, a Board Game for
Democracy Education
By: Rainer Adam, Pimrapaat Dusadeeisariyakul,
and Ben Fourniotis, Thailand
Identifying the Problem
In Thailand, as in many other emerging democracies,
youth participation in politics is rather limited. Many
young people do not have an interest in politics and
do not see how it affects their lives. Moreover, democratic values, democratic institutions such as parliament and political parties, and public decision-making processes are not well understood. Young people
also do not know through which channels they can
participate in the community.
Objectives
SIM-Democracy, a board game, was put together
by toy designers and democracy experts with the
intention of providing an interactive tool for young
adults and first-time voters so they might gain a better
understanding of the basic functioning of a democratic community and of public policy. Furthermore, the
aim is not so much to provide answers but to stimulate questions and further inquiry, thereby increasing
interest in public affairs.
Target Audience
Our target audience is high school students from 16 to
18 years old, first-time voters, and young adults (up
to 22 years old).
Methodology
Through the simulation of a simple democratic community, SIM-Democracy allows participants to play
different roles in a democratic society, to take on the
role of a government or the role of an ordinary citizen.
The government role involves budget planning and
resource allocation, spending, investment, provision
of infrastructure and support to citizens in four policy
areas — public health, security, public education and
environmental protection. The citizen role includes
generating income and paying taxes, taking initiative within the community, engaging in charity, and
monitoring the government. The implementation of
SIM-Democracy targets first-time voters, including
high school students and first-year or second-year
university students. The players compete with each
other to be elected for public office.
After the first testing of the game and a positive
preliminary evaluation, we involved the Election
Commission of Thailand (ECT), a partner organization of the Friedrich Naumann Foundation (the
Foundation) whose mission includes democracy education. The ECT incorporated the game into their educational program. In order to use SIM-Democracy on
a larger scale, a training of trainers was conducted to
produce play coaches — the individuals who facilitate
the games — who are capable of coaching teachers,
students and participants in general. In addition, training sessions were organized for the staff of the ECT.
In partnership with the ECT, SIM-Democracy was
officially endorsed and launched nationwide. In order
to encourage the use of SIM-Democracy in schools,
teachers were targeted and trained to become play
coaches at their respective schools. Over 300 teachers
were trained to be facilitators, mainly through playing
the game with Foundation staff.
Challenges
Currently, the major challenge in the implementation
of SIM-Democracy is that it relies heavily on play
coaches, without whom the players may not get the
most out of the game. Different play coaches may
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 125
also differ in their teaching style. It is, therefore, difficult to set a uniform standard for all play coaches.
Furthermore, it has been noted that even after the
training, not all teachers are capable of coaching their
students, especially when it is expected that they use
of modern educational tools and techniques. Despite
these obstacles, SIM-Democracy was considered
successful by all stakeholders. Most students mentioned that they have learned things such as how a
democratic government works and how it copes with
unexpected situations.
Participants were able to give immediate feedback on
the day which took the form of a recorded interview.
The Foundation has also kept in touch with schools
and teachers to enquire about the status of the game
post implementation. Teachers were also able to
give feedback on how the students engaged with the
game. Final evaluations take place with about 30-40
teachers, electoral commission staff, facilitators and
students.
Most teachers believed that this educational tool is
useful for their students and should be used in parallel with their teaching. Moreover, we noticed that
sometimes after only one session of SIM-Democracy
in a province, the lessons were multiplied and spontaneously introduced in neighboring provinces, which
reflects the popularity of the game as well as the
capacity of local trainers to coach and distribute SIMDemocracy to the interested public.
Results
After about 18 months of implementation we have
reached the following targets:
•
•
pproximately 350 play coaches and teachA
ers were trained;
Approximately 120 schools (including scout
camps and universities) all over Thailand
played SIM-Democracy;
•
•
pproximately 1800 students and others parA
ticipated in these activities so far;
SIM-Democracy exhibitions were conducted
in 12 provinces.
We have no data for schools that conducted SIMDemocracy sessions without participating in the
ECT-led training. We also do not know the extent of
the spontaneous spreading mentioned above. So far,
we have distributed about 750 games to the public
through educational institutions, public bodies, subdivisions of the ECT, Ministry of Education, etc.
In June 2013, we conducted a national SIMDemocracy competition held under the auspices of
the ECT. Schools from five regions competed. The
regional champions were invited to Bangkok, where
the national champion was selected. Awards were
presented by the ECT. The event was be publicly
broadcast on Thai public television.
Because of demand from neighboring countries
(Bhutan, Malaysia, Maynmar, among others), we are
currently also working on an English version of the
game. Moreover, together with a team of computer
experts and designers we are preparing an electronic
version of the game for tablets and smart phones. We
plan to release this version with a SIM-Democracy
app in early 2014.
Links:
https://www.facebook.com/SIMDemocracy
http://www.fnfasia.org/index.php?option=com_con
tent&view=article&id=1600:introducing-simdemocracy-&catid=3:latest-news
http://www.fnfasia.org/index.php?option=com_
content&view=article&id=1537:sim-democracyboard-game-edutainment&catid=3:latest-news
126 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
http://www.fnfasia.org/index.php?option=com_
content&view=article&id=1587:sim-democracyunderstanding-democracy-in-a-playfulway&catid=3:latest-news
SIM Democracy Board Game
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtm7SxJjeVU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysXgZThZ4vM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYzVS3YNZw8
SIM Democracy Brochure
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 127
Using Stories to Develop Political Literacy
By: Ted Huddlestone, United Kingdom
Identifying the Problem
To be able to participate in the democratic process
in any meaningful sense, citizens need not only to
be aware of democratic ideals and values but also
to be able to apply them in practice. Fundamental to
this ability is political literacy, the development of
practical political understanding and judgement, and
the ability to communicate these sentiments to fellow
citizens. Lacking basic political literacy, citizens often
feel estranged from the political process. They may
even feel that their actions are well-meaning but ineffective or even counter-productive.
Objective
Introduced in the right kind of way, stories can
help citizens to develop political literacy, feel more
empowered and positive about their role in the political process, and ultimately, become more effective as
democratic citizens.
Target Audience
Stories can be used as an educational tool with people of any age, from students in primary schools to
adults in continuing education programs. In fact, if the
language is sufficiently accessible and the narrative
”rich” enough, the same story can be used across a
range of age groups, with the level of response varying with the group.
•
•
•
•
to solve
open-ended – suggest a range of potential solutions
engaging – stimulate the imagination and emotions as well as intellect
accessible – comprehensible to all
succinct – as brief as possible
Traditional stories with ”morals” or ”happy endings”
are inappropriate. It is important that learners do not
feel they are being guided towards any particular
solution to the problem(s) raised by the story, but
instead feel encouraged to think independently. The
story should always contain some element of controversy with which to encourage diversity of opinion
and stimulate debate—not an ”either-or” dilemma,
but one with a range of possible responses.
Educational stories of this kind tend to be few and
far between. Teachers new to this approach might
be advised to use or adapt existing examples, such
as those featured in some of the publications by the
Citizenship Foundation.1 Better, they should try to
develop their own, adapting them to local circumstances and interests.
Methodology
Examples of stories that can be used with younger
children include Click, Clack, Moo-Cows That Type2
and The Sand Tray.3 For secondary school students,
useful examples include Enemy of the People4 and
The School on the Edge of the Forest.5
In using stories to develop political literacy, two factors are crucial: the selection of the story and the ways
in which learners interact with it. Stories selected for
this purpose should be:
Having selected or developed a story, the next step is
to devise activities that enable learners to interact with
the story. These activities should:
• politically rich – embed conflicting political concepts, principles, or debates
• problematic – present the learner with a problem
• encourage critical thinking and discussion
• permit all students to express their opinions
• feature both individual and group work
128 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
• be introduced at increasing levels of difficulty
• make explicit the political concepts, principles, or
debates implicit in the story
• allow students to apply these concepts, principles,
and debates to actual situations
Example Lesson
Step 1. R
ead the story The Kingdom of Sikkal together
(5 minutes).
Step 2. A
sk students in to work in pairs to list what
they think would be good things and bad
things about living in that society. The students share their ideas with the rest of the class
(10 minutes).
Step 3. A
s a class, ask students to consider whether or
not they think Sikkal is a fair society, noting
the reasons for their views and where they
agree and disagree (15 minutes).
Step 4. I n small groups, ask students to decide what
actions they would take (if any) if they were
citizens of Sikkal to make their society a fairer
one. The students share their ideas with the
rest of the class (15 minutes).
Step 5. A
sk the class to think about the ideas suggested and evaluate the potential consequences of
each—negative as well as positive—including
unintended ones, and consider whether they
would be ”worth” it (15 minutes).
Step 6. T
ogether, try to arrive at an agreed set of
”fairnesses” that would be needed for a
society to be described as a fair one, considering whether they are always mutually
consistent or might sometimes conflict (15
minutes).
Step 7. A
sk the class how far they think their own
society lives up to the set of ideals they have
devised, and what if anything might be done
to make it fairer (15 minutes).
The Kingdom of Sikkal
For centuries it has had little contact with the rest of
the world.
Although Sikkal is only a tiny kingdom, it has
attracted a lot of interest lately. This is mainly
because of the unusual way in which society is organized there.
To begin with, no one in Sikkal ever goes hungry.
The Sikkalese people produce all their own food
and it is shared out to whoever needs it. A house is
provided rent-free for every family. The size of the
house depends on the number of people in the family. Fuel for heating and cooking is provided free of
charge, as is a regular repair service. Should anyone
ever fall sick, a doctor is always at hand. Everyone is
given a free medical check-up every six months and
care-workers make regular visits to old people, families with young children and anyone else who needs
extra attention.
In Sikkal the good things in life are available to all.
Each family is given a book of vouchers which they
exchange each year for different luxury items, e.g.,
scent, soft furnishings, spices. The vouchers can be
traded in right away or saved up over a period of time
for something special.
How have the people of Sikkal been able to organize
all these things? As far back as anyone can remember, Sikkal has been ruled by a royal family. The
present ruler is King Sik III. He decides the number
of workers needed for each kind of work, e.g., growing food, building houses, or medical care. The people who do these jobs are selected at five years of age
and sent to special schools for training. Farmers are
sent to agricultural school, house-builders to technical
school, health-workers to medical school and so on.
Everyone else of working age is employed by King
Sik in one of his royal palaces.
Sikkal is a country situated high in the mountains.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 129
The most amazing thing about Sikkal is that there
is no such thing as money. No one needs to be paid
because everyone already has everything they need!
You may be asking yourself whether anyone in Sikkal
ever complains about these arrangements. In fact, this
very rarely happens. The few people that do complain
are looked after in secure mental hospitals. After all,
you would have to be mad to complain about life in a
society like this, wouldn’t you?
Challenges
The two main challenges to this approach are the
teachers’ occasional lack of confidence in dealing
with political issues in class and their lack of expertise in critical thinking and discussion-based methods
of teaching. It is an approach which demands a high
level of skill and personal efficacy from teachers. The
only way to overcome these challenges is through
training and practice. Ideally, training should focus
on helping teachers to develop their own stories and
learning activities, rather than simply relying on existing ones.
Results
The use of story in political literacy teaching was
one of the methods explored in the Citizenship
Foundation’s Political Literacy Project. This was a
two-year project to develop a programme of discussion-based materials to support the teaching of political literacy at Key Stages 3 and 4 (ages 11 to 16) in
secondary schools in England, in association with the
introduction of Citizenship into the national curriculum in 2002. The response from teachers and students
who took part in the project evaluation was universally positive. Aspects singled out for comment by
participating teachers included the open-ended nature
of the project materials, the potential for engaging student interests, the quality of student discussions, and
the focus on political language and the vocabulary of
politics.7 Following the success of the original project
in England, this approach has been used in teacher
education seminars in a number of countries across
Europe and in Turkey and Bahrain.
(Endnotes)
For example: Ted Huddleston & Don Rowe (2001)
Good Thinking: Education for Citizenship and Moral
Responsibility, Evans Brothers, Volumes 1-3; Ted Huddleston
(2004) Citizens and Society: Political Literacy Teacher
Resource Pack, Hodder Murray.
1
Dorothy Cronin (2002) Click, Clack, Moo- Cows That
Type, Simon & Schuster UK.
2
3
Don Rowe (2001) The Sand Tray, A & C Black.
4
Ted Huddleston (2004) op cit.
5
Ted Huddleston & Don Rowe (2001) op cit., Volume 3.
6
Ted Huddleston & Don Rowe (2001) op cit., Volume 2.
Ian Davies et al (2002) ‘Political Literacy: An Essential Part
of Citizenship Education’, The School Field: International
Journal of Theory and Research in Education, Vol XIII,
No 3/4.
7
130 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Democracy Education Programs
Based at Law Schools
By: Lee Arbetman, United States
Identifying the Problem
Whether a country’s democracy is new, emerging, or
established, there is an on-going need to revitalize
and support democratic values and practices through
education. Democracies are not automatically self-regenerating. As retired US Supreme Court Justice
Sandra Day O’Connor has said, “Knowledge of our
system of government (democracy) is not handed
down through the gene pool. … The habits of citizenship must be learned.”
At the very core of learning about democracy is learning about the law. Law schools have a unique role
in this regard. Their mission is to teach law. While
their primary focus is on teaching law students who
will become lawyers, they also have the institutional
capacity to teach beyond the walls of the law school
and to educate communities about law, legal systems,
democracy, and constitutions.
Objective
The Street Law program began at Georgetown University
Law Center in Washington, DC, in 1972. A credit-bearing clinical program was piloted that allowed upper
division (in the US, second and third year) law students
to use empowering, innovative student-centered teaching
methods to teach lessons about law and public policy in
public high schools in the District of Columbia.
From the start, the program has had two missions:
to educate youth, particularly disadvantaged youth,
about legal topics that would be of value to them in
their daily lives and to strengthen the law students’
legal education by requiring them to teach legal topics
to non-lawyers.
The clinical Street Law program at Georgetown
recently celebrated its 40th anniversary. This program
has been a democracy education and legal education
innovation of the first order. A global organization—
Street Law, Inc.—has developed as an outgrowth of
the original Georgetown Street Law clinical program.
Street Law, Inc. creates classroom and community
programs that teach people about law, democracy,
and human rights worldwide. Street Law’s accessible,
interactive programs empower students and communities to become active, legally-astute contributors to
society. These programs utilize the trademark qualities of the original Street Law program at Georgetown
and are practical, relevant, and participatory. In addition, Street Law has produced a textbook used all over
the United States (Street Law: A Course in Practical
Law, Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, 2010, 8th edition) along
with culturally sensitive, legally accurate adaptations
of the textbook used in many other countries.
Street Law, Inc. and the clinical program at Georgetown
have worked with law schools across the country and
around the world. More than 70 law school-based
Street Law programs exist in the US, while more
than 50 programs operate in other countries. These
law school programs are particularly prominent in
South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the former
Soviet Republics. In the US, the majority of the law
school-based Street Law programs award academic
credit to the law students who participate. However,
a growing number of these programs are either part
of law schools’ pro bono programs or are student-run
clubs and do not award academic credit.
Many of the credit-bearing programs are based closely on the Georgetown Clinic model and have the
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 131
following characteristics:
• Law students (often in teams of two) teach two or
three times per week over the course of a semester
in nearby high schools (primarily urban schools
serving diverse youth).
• Law students attend a weekly seminar that focuses
on the content to be taught, developing effective
lesson plans and teaching activities, and clinic
administration.
• Clinic staff supervise the law students in the field,
observe classes, and provide feedback.
Target Audience
Participating law students most often work with high
school students who are either in a law class or in
another social studies class that contains law-related
content such as civics, history, or government. Because
the law school programs tend to focus on disadvantaged teenagers—those in the US who research has
shown receive the weakest civic/democracy education—some programs also work in community-based
settings, residential facilities, or the juvenile justice
system. Some programs also teach adults, including
those behind bars or in homeless shelters.
Methodology
Most of the programs operate for one semester,
although the Georgetown clinical Street Law program
is year-long.
There is significant variation in the teaching tools
used to achieve the objectives of this program. Many
participating high schools use the Street Law textbook
from which the law students teach lessons. However,
the law school programs that award credit often
require the law students to create their own lessons as
part of the academic component of the program.
A highlight of the Georgetown program is an annual
city-wide interscholastic high school mock trial com-
petition. The mock trials are held in the courtrooms
of the DC Superior Court, and many of the trials are
judged by sitting state and federal court judges. Each
high school Street Law class in the city enters at least
one team in the competition. The Georgetown Street
Law program develops a challenging mock trial case
each year for the competition. Training high school
students to take on the roles of attorneys and witnesses is a substantial academic challenge both for the law
student instructors and for their high school students.
The first high school mock trial occurred as part of
the Street Law program in Washington, DC, in 1973.
Since then, the program has spread to virtually every
state in the US Almost all states now have a statewide
high school mock trial competition that culminates in
a national competition among the winners of the state
tournaments. In 2012, more than a 1,000 people from
42 states, Guam, the Northern Marianna Islands, and
South Korea participated in the national mock trial
tournament in Albuquerque, New Mexico. A number
of lawyers in practice today cite their experience in
their high school mock trial program for heading
them in the direction of a career in law. In addition
to mock trials, law students help their high school
students understand democratic processes and structures through mock legislative simulations and mock
appellate hearings.
Street Law, Inc. collects information about the law
school-based programs. The website contains a directory of law school-based Street Law programs along
with a resource library of materials— including
free copies of all of the Georgetown Law Schooldeveloped mock trial materials—that are helpful
to persons starting or conducting a program. A
particularly good set of law student-written and
classroom-tested lessons can be found on the web
page for the Street Law program at the University of
Washington in Seattle, WA.
132 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Challenges
To create a program, a series of basic questions must
be answered:
• Who will teach in the program (law students) and
who will teach these instructors (law faculty and
staff)?
• Who will receive the lessons taught by the program (typically high school students, but possibly
teens or young adults in non-traditional school or
community settings)?
• What lessons will be taught?
• How will they be taught (the issue of effective,
empowering pedagogy)?
• How will the program be incentivized (will there
be academic credit)?
• How will success be determined?
Typically, there are a few significant hurdles. The
staff at both Street Law, Inc. and the Georgetown
Street Law Program are available on a limited basis
to help others overcome these challenges.
If the program is to be a credit-bearing program at
the law school—and Street Law, Inc. believes this
structure leads to the highest program quality—then
the program must go through the faculty’s approval
process. This process can be lengthy and challenging.
If the primary advocate for the program is a tenured
and widely respected member of the faculty, the
process can be easier. If the advocate is an adjunct
or an outside organization and not well known to the
faculty, the process is more difficult. Law schools
with a commitment to experiential learning are more
likely to embrace Street Law quickly. Law schools
with more traditional views of legal education will be
a harder sell.
Most often, the school system sees as very appealing the opportunity to have bright, energetic law
students willing to volunteer in their social stud-
ies classrooms. Still, details must be worked out:
which classes will the law students visit, how often,
what role will the teacher of that class have, who
will be responsible for grades and for discipline,
etc. In some school systems, law students must
first be certified as substitute teachers or complete
background checks.
In the US, this program has a special appeal beyond
the obvious support it provides for civic/democracy
education. The legal industry in the US struggles
with a lack of diversity among lawyers. The country’s
population is more than 30 percent non-white and
trending in the foreseeable future to 50% or more nonwhite, while the law profession is comprised of about
10 percent non-white lawyers, a number which has
remained stubbornly constant for a number of years.
The Street Law program is a specific activity that law
schools can undertake to expose diverse teens not
only to the law and democratic practice but to careers
in the law. In this respect, Street Law can be viewed
as a diversity pipeline program. According to the
American Bar Association’s Presidential Commission
on Diversity in the Legal Profession (2010),“Lawyers
and judges have a unique responsibility for sustaining
a political system with broad participation by all its
citizens. A diverse bar and bench create greater trust in
the mechanisms of government and the rule of law.”1
Results
There is a great deal of anecdotal information from
both high school students and from their law student
instructors about the value of the Street Law program.
The high school students are affected not only by the
knowledge they acquire but also by the powerful,
positive role models that their law student teachers
become for them. Law students, who typically have
not had direct experience with urban education, are
exposed to a significant social program in the US
and have the opportunity to improve their mastery of
legal content, strengthen public speaking skills, and
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 133
practice collaboration with each other and with other
professionals. One measure of the success of Street
Law at law schools is that most law schools that begin
a Street Law program continue it. The value of the
program to the law school’s students and to the wider
community becomes clear quickly.
For more information:
There is no meaningful data on the extent to which
democracy is strengthened in the US or, to our knowledge, in other countries from the Street Law program.
The methodological challenge of identifying experimental groups that have participated in Street Law
and control groups that are identical to the experimental groups except for the treatment (Street Law),
while also controlling for other variables that affect
democracy outcomes over time has been too great to
overcome. But law school-based Street Law programs
continue to grow throughout the US and around the
world as well, which indicates a widely-held belief in
their value.
www.streetlaw.org/lawschools
Street Law, Inc. and the Georgetown Street Law
Program ([email protected])
Street Law program at the University of Washington
in Seattle, WA (www.law.washington.edu/streetlaw)
www.nationalmocktrial.org
South Africa (www.streetlaw.org.za)
Street Law, Inc. (www.streetlaw.org)
(Endnotes)
American Bar Association, Diversity in the Legal
Profession: the Next Steps. 2010. pp 5.
1
134 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Deliberating in a Democracy
By: Lee Arbetman and Xinia Bermudez, United States
Identifying the Problem
Freedom of speech is the foundation of a healthy
democracy. So is the art of balancing democratic
values, such as liberty and equality with safety and
security. For democracy to thrive, citizens must be able
and willing to express and exchange ideas among themselves and with their representatives in government
and be able to weigh courses of action and potential
consequences. When values are in conflict, freedom of
speech becomes a critical vehicle for exploring choices,
weighing options, and finding common ground.
In addition to freedom of speech, strong democracies
also need members who are willing to listen to and to
respect others with viewpoints very different from their
own—particularly on controversial issues.1 Deliberating
civic issues—weighing opposing views, deciding difficult questions, accepting majority decisions while
honoring dissent—is not natural behavior but requires
instruction, skill, and multiple opportunities to practice.
While civic participation in both emerging and stable
democratic societies depends on the ability to engage in
deliberative discussions of controversial issues, there is
little evidence that in-depth discussions of controversial
issues regularly occur in either the U.S. or in countries
in Eastern Europe.2
Unfortunately, civics teachers often avoid controversial issues or address them as current events without
much insight or reflection. Although many Americans
recoil from a system they perceive as driven by narrow self-interest and messy conflict, “to the extent
the climate in schools these days avoids controversial
political issues and does not help students to be comfortable in dealing with those issues, a great disservice
is done to the students and the democratic process.”3
Hahn adds: “When students have the opportunity to
discuss controversial public policy issues in a sup-
portive atmosphere, where several sides of an issue
are presented or explored, and they feel comfortable
expressing their view even when they differ from the
teacher’s and other students’, then there is a great likelihood that adolescents will express higher levels of
political efficacy, interest, trust, and confidence than
their peers without such experiences.”4
Objective
The goal of Deliberating in a Democracy is to
increase the knowledge, ability and dispositions of
high school teachers and their students to effectively
participate in deliberations of controversial issues
related to democratic principles in their countries.
Deliberation provides students with a deeper understanding of issues facing their democracies and helps
develop a well-reasoned position by helping students
understand a point of view different than their own.
It also ensures that conflicting views can be heard,
understood, and valued.
This program uses deliberation, which can enhance
students’ academic knowledge and build civic skills,
especially the ability to discuss with others how to
solve pressing public problems.5 Students who effectively participate in deliberations on controversial
public issues increase their political knowledge, political tolerance, perspective taking skills, and political
participation.6 Since the deliberation of controversial
public issues can play a central role in increasing
political knowledge, political tolerance, perspective
taking, and political participation,7 Street Law, Inc.
worked with students to increase these skills through
deliberation of controversial topics with the intention
of helping them (1) to gain a deeper understanding of
an issue, (2) to find areas of common agreement, and
(3) to make a decision based on evidence and logic.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 135
Target Audience
Since the inception of the Deliberating in a Democracy
program in 2004, more than 550 secondary teachers
in ten different cities across the United States and in
13 countries in Russia, Azerbaijan, Eastern Europe,
and Latin America have engaged nearly 41,000
secondary students in authentic civic deliberations
while learning democratic principles and participating in lessons on democracy. Street Law, Inc.,
Constitutional Rights Foundation Chicago (CRFC),
and Constitutional Rights Foundation (CRF) with
their global partners are able to provide training and
technical support to countries wishing to implement a
deliberation program. Methodology
Teachers who participated in the Deliberating in a
Democracy program attended professional development workshops on how to successfully conduct a
classroom deliberation using the Structured Academic
Controversy (SAC) method, developed by the Johnson
brothers at the University of Minnesota. The SAC
method was designed to help students achieve three
goals: (1) to gain a deeper understanding of an issue,
(2) to find areas of common agreement, and (3) to
make a decision based on evidence and logic. In the
SAC method, students are organized into groups of
four, and each group is split into two pairs. One pair in
a foursome studies one side of the controversy, while
the second pair studies the opposing view, even though
it may conflict with their own personal view. Partners
read the background material and identify facts and
arguments that support their assigned position. Each
side advocates their position, while students on the
other side make notes and ask questions about information they don’t understand after the other team is
done presenting. Afterwards, the pairs reverse positions, using their notes and what they learned from the
other side to make a short presentation demonstrating
their understanding of the opposing view. Students
then discuss the issue in their foursomes, trying to find
points of agreement and disagreement among group
members. Teams try to reach consensus on the issue; if
they cannot reach consensus on any substantive aspect
of the issue, they should try to reach consensus on areas
of agreement and on a process they could use to resolve
disagreements. The class then debriefs the activity as
a large group, focusing on how the group worked as
a team and how use of the process contributed to their
understanding of the issue.
Participating teachers conducted a minimum of three
classroom deliberations, using the SAC method, which
were chosen from curriculum materials created for
Deliberating in a Democracy. Lessons on 38 controversial public issues, in English, Russian, Spanish, and
other languages, are available at www.deliberating.org.
Materials include a grade-level reading with a focus
question and additional resources, such as political
cartoons and quotes. The website also featured student
polls and a discussion board. Students also deliberated issues and current events with their peers in other
countries via videoconference, web cam, and/or Skype.
Students also had the option to participate in multischool conferences at their site. Teachers were given
the opportunity to travel abroad to visit each other’s
classrooms, meet with other teachers, officials, scholars, and participate in seminars on democracy.
Challenges
There were various challenges that teachers faced
during the deliberation process in their classrooms.
Timing was a major concern for many teachers, as it
is difficult to fit the entire explanation and process of
deliberation into a 45 minute time frame. To address
this issue, teachers often assigned the reading for
homework, sometimes even having students distinguish the pros and cons of each question before
coming to class. Teachers were then able to dedicate
the full period to the deliberations, and the debriefing
afterwards. Teachers also faced the challenge of group
discussions dominated by a small group of students or
136 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
managing deliberations in classes of 30-40 students.
In response, teachers strategically placed students
in small groups, grouping more vocal and quieter
students in separate groups. This gave all students a
greater chance of their voices being heard.
Another frequent problem was posed by small groups
finishing their deliberations at a different rate. The
groups that ended earlier than other groups were
encouraged to delve deeper into the topic, whether it
was by explaining further their personal views, finding more reasons to add to their consensus, or prodding them further by acting as a “devil’s advocate.”
At times, the teacher selected issues which they
believed were sufficiently engaging for their classes
but which students did not consider controversial, and
students quickly came to a consensus. Teachers had
several different methodologies to address the lack
of controversy obstacle. Some teachers played the
role of devil’s advocate by challenging students from
different perspectives or referencing reasons not listed
in the curricular materials. Others galvanized students
by connecting the topic to current events: for example, the “Public Demonstrations” deliberation was a
success during the “Occupy Wall Street” movement.
Results
An independent evaluation conducted by the
University of Minnesota in 2009 revealed that
Deliberating in a Democracy was effective in multiple
cultural and educational contexts:
• Over 98 percent of teachers reported that “almost
all” of their students engaged in critical thinking
during the deliberations and developed a better
understanding of the issues;
• Over 88 percent of students “agreed” or “strongly agreed” that the deliberations increased their
understanding of the issues, and that they “learned
a lot” from the process;
• Over 77 percent of students reported a greater
ability to state their opinions, and 72 percent said
they developed more confidence in talking about
public issues;
• Almost 100 percent of teachers indicated that they
would continue to use deliberations after the conclusion of the project.
A subsequent evaluation by the University of
Minnesota in December 2012 found that over 90
percent of teachers Agreed to Strongly Agreed that
deliberations helped their students to develop a deeper understanding of issues (96 percent), engage in
critical thinking (94 percent), make decisions based
on evidence and logic (93 percent), respect others’
points of view (91 percent), and identify multiple
perspectives associated with the deliberation topics
(94 percent).
(Endnotes)
1
Barber, 2004.
Gimpel et al., 2003; Larson & Parker, 1996; Niemi &
Niemi, 2007, DEEP; 2000; The International Association
for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) study
of 90,000 students in 28 countries reported that an open
classroom climate for discussion is a significant predictor of
civic knowledge, support for democratic values, participation in political discussion, and political engagement (measured by whether young people say they will vote when they
are legally able) (Torney-Purta, 2001).
2
3
Hibbing and Theise-Morse, 2002.
4
Hahn, 1998.
5
Harris, 1996; Hess & Posselt, 2002.
6
e.g., Hess, 2009; Parker, 2003; Torney-Purta et al., 2001.
Gimpel, Celeste, & Schuknecht, 2003; Zukin, Keeter,
Andolina, Jenkins, & Delli Carpini, 2006.
7
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 137
Acronym Guide
AusAID – Australian Agency for
International Development
ICCPR – International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights
BLTP – Burundi Leadership Training
Program
ICESCR – International Covenant on
Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights
CCD – Council for a Community of
Democracies
Idasa – Institute for Democracy in
Africa (South Africa)
CD – Community of Democracies
IED – Institute for Education in
Democracy
CEDAW – Convention on the
Elimination of all forms of
Discrimination Against Women
CR – Children’s Rights
CRF – Constitutional Rights Foundation
CRFC – Constitutional Rights
Foundation Chicago
CSO – civil society organization
CVE – civic/voter educator
DICE – Drama Improves Lisbon Key
Competences in Education
ECK – Electoral Commission of Kenya
EDC – education for democratic
citizenship
EfD – education for democracy
HRE – human rights education
IGD – Institute for Governance and
Development (Nepal)
IPE – International Projects in Education
(Switzerland)
MoE – Ministry of Education
MoNE – Ministry of National Education
(Turkey)
NGO – nongovernmental organization
NIMD – Netherlands Institute for
Multiparty Democracy
TIE – Theater in Education
UDHR – Universal Declaration of Human
Rights
UNICEF – United Nations Children’s
Fund
USAID – United States Agency for
International Development
138 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
Organizations Working on Democracy Education
This list is by no means exhaustive but rather serves
as a starting point for those interested in learning
about democracy education around the world.
The Academy of Political Education was
founded in 1993 as non-profit, non-governmental
organization to serve the society and aimed to assist
in creation of the democratic society, respecting
human rights and liberties, rule of law, and civil
society. The primary objective of the Academy of
Political Education of Mongolia is to support and
strengthen civil society, rule of law and a democratic
state which respects individual human rights and
liberties. To achieve its goals the Academy is implementing the activities such as providing training and
seminars, carrying out research, publishing periodicals, brochures and textbooks. Today the Academy
has become one of the most capable Mongolian
NGOs. The Academy is continually developing
new programs and publications to meet Mongolia’s
future needs. Mongolia’s 1990 democratic transition
provided development opportunities based on principles of democracy, human rights, civil liberties,
rule of law and civil society. The new Mongolian
Constitution, adopted in 1992, guaranties freedom
of assembly, speech, and press. Education of citizens
about new democratic values has become extremely
important issue.
Acción para el Desarrollo conducts informal
civic education workshops for leaders of neighborhood associations in underdeveloped neighborhoods in and around Caracas, Venezuela. Workshops
focus on the themes of democratic values, the role
of civil society and community organizations in
democracy, how to negotiate and mediate local
conflicts, the Bolivarian Constitution and the rights
of Venezuelans, and how to address the violation of
human rights.
The African Centre for Democracy and
Human Rights Studies (ACDHRS) is a regional nongovernmental organization based in The
Gambia that promotes, in cooperation with other
African and international institutions, the observance of human rights and democratic principles
throughout Africa. Currently, the ACDHRS is in
the process of developing a civic education training
manual for teaching human rights in primary and
secondary schools.
The Albert Shanker Institute is a nonprofit
organization dedicated to vibrant democracy, quality public education, a voice for working people in
decisions affecting their jobs and their lives, and
free and open debate about all of these issues.
The Association for Civic Education (ASPEC),
an independent nongovernmental organization
based in Bucharest, is committed to the promotion of civic education and democratic values in
Romania. ASPEC is in the process of initiating a
nation-wide training program for 300 young civic
and political activists. This educational program
aims to encourage greater cooperation among a
new generation of political and civic activists at the
grassroots level in Romania.
The Campaign Against Violent Events (CAVE)
works towards the promotion of peace, the rule of
law, and human rights in Sierra Leone. To teach
the youth of Sierra Leone about democracy, CAVE
maintains a program of civic education through
theatre troupes, radio programs and roundtable discussions. In addition, CAVE provides human rights
training for activists on issues of conflict resolution,
good governance, human rights monitoring, and
documentation.
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 139
The Campaign for the Civic Mission of
Schools works in the United States to expand and
improve civic education in American schools and
institutions of higher education. The Campaign
cooperates with over 60+ coalition partners on
advocacy and other projects.
The Center for Civic Education is a nongovernmental organization in California that runs
programs with the assistance of public and private
sector partners. It interacts with the educational
community in more than eighty countries, including many emerging democracies.
The Center for Civic Education Indonesia
(CCEI), in cooperation with the Indonesian National
Ministry of Education, coordinates a program to
make civic education a successful and sustainable
part of Indonesian education reform. CCEI has
engaged the services of 36 provincial coordinators
from all twelve Indonesian provinces.
The Center for Information and Research on
Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE) is
an organization based in the United States that promotes research on the civic and political engagement
of Americans between the ages of 15 and 25.
The Center for Support of Democratic Youth
Initiatives carries out a wide variety of projects
relating to democratic curriculum development
and teacher training. The Center for Support of
Democratic Youth Initiatives believes that for a genuine democratic transformation in Russia, schools
must educate students about democratic philosophies and practices, and the Perm-based Center
for Support of Democratic Youth Initiatives thus
offers training in human rights education to teachers throughout the Perm oblast, develops and tests
human rights curricula in local schools, and publishes teacher training guides and textbooks.
The Citizenship Forum (CF) is dedicated to
promoting and institutionalizing democracy in
Morocco. The Forum’s education on citizenship
program involves the strengthening of 25 civic
clubs inside schools throughout Morocco, promotes
the importance of teachers who serve as project
coordinators, and seeks to create three new civic
clubs at the university level. The Citizenship Forum
also publishes two editions of an Arabic newsletter
called “Citizenship,” an educational publication
that is widely distributed among CF’s network,
which also serves to foster greater interest in the
Forum’s educational programs.
The Citizenship Foundation is an independent education and participation charity based in
London. Founded in 1989, it focuses on developing
young people’s citizenship skills and their knowledge and understanding of the law, democracy, and
public life. It works nationally and internationally
to: champion civic participation; support teachers,
schools and colleges in the teaching of citizenship
education; and help young people in community
settings with issues which are important to them.
The Citizenship Project and the US-based “You
the PEOPLE” program are developing a civic education curriculum for Russian public schools and
in the Republic of Karelia. The goal of the “You the
PEOPLE” Program in Russia and Karelia is to make
democratic skills and attitudes a way of life by using
the latest teaching methods in newly democratic
states. The program teaches civics and government
through a variety of subject areas, from geography
to physics.
The Civic Education Partnership Initiative
(CEPI) brings together partners from the US and
Morocco to create significant impact on the teaching and learning of civic education in both countries. CEPI has experience in international civic
140 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
education, teacher education, curriculum development, education policy development, major program completion and in-country expertise.
Civitas Senegal is a member of Civitas
International, a global network of civic educators
that aims at developing civic education among
youth in schools and community settings. Civitas
has developed Project Citizen, a curricular based
civic education program in Senegal. Civitas Senegal
conducted programs in collaboration with the
Ministry of Education, ICRC (International Red
Cross Committee, using Project Citizen in the
“Exploring Humanitarian Law program”) and is
presently developing a human rights education
program with Sencirk a youth at risk education
association.
The Donetsk Human Rights School (DHRS)
aims to assist in the reform of education and the
establishment of institutions for civic education
in Ukraine. The DHRS develops materials for civic
education by providing programs of teacher training
and curriculum development for secondary school
teachers. In addition, the DHRS organizes a national
conference for civic education specialists and a civic
education training seminar; prepares a guide to civic
education resources for faculty and students of pedagogical institutes; updates its courses on civic education for use in Ukrainian schools; and prepares
and releases electronic versions of its teaching aids
on CD-ROM.
The Eastern Youths Democratic Forum
(EYDF) is a nongovernmental, nonpartisan organization that promotes democracy in Eastern Nigeria.
The EYDF provides civic education materials
through each of its five offices and offers training
to young people on the use of computers and the
Internet to stimulate their educational development
and awareness about democratic principles.
The Education Foundation is a nonprofit organization committed to working for the oppressed
laborers and marginalized people of Pakistan. The
Foundation conducts a project called Democratic
Development Pakistan that provides education and
training for the promotion and expansion of democratic ideas in Pakistan, in addition to its Campaign for a
Peaceful Pakistan, a project for establishing peace. The
Foundation also provides education and training to
students, youth, lawyers, journalists and civil society
organizations, and works to increase awareness about
the rights of working women in Pakistan.
The Educational Society of Malopolska
(MTO) promotes civic education and activism at
the grassroots level in nine regions of the Balkans.
The MTO organizes five training workshops and
site visits in Poland and in the Balkans for local
activists from the region. These workshops assist
in the creation of 20 new parent-teacher NGOs and
support of its network in rural towns in Albania,
Kosovo, Bosnia, Montenegro, Bulgaria, Macedonia,
Romania, Serbia, and Croatia. In addition, the MTO
has created a small grants program to encourage
local civic education programs, with a focus on
inter-ethnic projects.
Facing History and Ourselves is an international, nonprofit educational organization whose
mission is to promote democratic citizenship by
providing curriculum and strategies for teachers,
students and communities. By illuminating common themes of justice, law and morality in past
and present, Facing History teaches a framework
and a vocabulary for examining the meaning and
responsibilities of citizenship, whether in a school,
community or the wider society.
First Amendment Schools: Educating for
Freedom and Responsibility is a national
reform initiative designed to transform how schools
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 141
model and teach the rights and responsibilities of
citizenship that frame civic life in the US. To achieve
this goal, the First Amendment Schools (FAS) project serves as a national resource for all schools interested in affirming First Amendment principles and
putting them into action in their school communities. The FAS project is designed to help schools create the types of environments that allow all members
of the community to understand what it means to be
an active, civically engaged citizen.
The Forum for Education and Democracy
engages with the public education system in order
to solve issues of social justice through encouraging
greater citizen participation in the United States. The
mission of the Forum is to create a system in which
students build connections to their communities.
The Foundation for Education for Democracy
(FED), a nonpartisan, independent NGO based in
Warsaw, works towards the advancement and dissemination of democratic ideas by helping organizations develop the skills needed to advance their
countries’ democratic transitions. FED conducts
civic education, leadership, and NGO development
workshops designed to create core groups of indigenous civic educators so that they may teach their
countries’ citizens about the rights and responsibilities of living in a democracy.
Since its establishment in 1958, the German
Friedrich Naumann Foundation for
Freedom (FNF) is active at home and abroad.
The work of the Foundation is based on the
political philosophy of classical liberalism. Its
international engagement is part of the Federal
Republic of Germany’s foreign development program. The Foundation has close ties to the liberal
Free Democratic Party (FDP). The fundamental
values of the FNF are freedom and responsibility,
human dignity and peace. The Foundation has
seven regional and 44 project offices in more than
60 project countries.
The Generation for the Integrity of Lebanon
(GIL), a nonprofit youth organization, works to promote human rights, pluralism, democracy, and youth
participation in civic activities. GIL believes that the
most likely avenue for genuine civic participation
that transcends sectarian affiliations is among the
youth. Thus, GIL conducts youth training workshops at the grassroots level that includes lectures,
discussions, debates, educational games, role playing
and multi-media materials. As a result of the project, GIL publishes a book that includes the training
materials, discussions, and names of participants,
and that serves as a permanent reference on the issue.
GIL publicizes and distributes the book to the wider
community (parliamentarians, journalists, NGOs,
decision makers in political parties, university professors, etc.) and uses it as a reference in the design
of future civic education activities.
GONG is a nongovernmental organization based
in Zagreb that carries out a civic education program
entitled, “I Vote for the First Time.” The main objective of the program is to inform high school students who are approaching voting age about their
role as citizens in a democracy and the importance
of participating in elections. The program consists
of workshops addressing topics such as an overview of Croatia’s political and electoral system; the
basic elements of the country’s electoral laws at the
national and local level; efforts that are being undertaken to amend and improve these laws; the fundamental rights of the voter; and information on how
citizens can get involved in the political process.
Nancy Flowers, is a founder of Human Rights
Educators USA (HRE USA), a national network
dedicated to building a culture of respect for human
rights. Established in 2012, HRE USA facilitates
142 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
collaboration to integrate human rights education
(HRE) into formal and non-formal educational
settings; advocate for the inclusion of HRE in education policies, standards, curricula, and pedagogy;
provide teacher-training programs and HRE resources; and contribute to global scholarship on HRE. For
more information see http://www.hreusa.net.
and beyond. IDE-Ghana’s vision is to become a
leading think tank in the promotion of democracy
education and good governance. The mission of
IDE-Ghana is to enhance the knowledge of citizens
about democratic principles and values in order to
advance democracy and good governance in Ghana
and beyond.
Idasa, the most prominent independent democracy
institute in Africa, closed in March 2013 after more
than 25 years of path-breaking democracy-building
work across the continent. Founded in 1987, Idasa
played a significant role in South Africa’s transition
to democracy, facilitating the first major conversations between the white political establishment and
the exiled liberation movements. Following South
Africa’s first democratic election in 1994, Idasa’s mission expanded to help build democratic societies in
Africa. Democracy education constituted a key part
of this work, gradually evolving beyond basic civic
literacy to include grassroots leadership training and
the creation of informal schools for democracy to
nurture agency and a sense of democratic possibility
among citizens.
Over the last 20 years, the Institute for Education
in Democracy (IED) has become synonymous
with democracy and good governance, and particularly elections, as it is the premiere organization
working in the areas of democratic governance
and electoral processes in Kenya. As a non-governmental and non-partisan organization, IED enjoys
a unique position, being one of the very few civil
society organizations (CSOs) with a strategic niche
in democratic governance, elections and electoral
observation. Since inception in 1993, IED’s work
has focused on promoting democratic, peaceful
and credible elections and referenda in Kenya and
the Africa region through strengthening electoral
administration, management, institutions and infrastructure, and support towards electoral reforms.
The Information Centre on Human Rights
Education in Belarus works on the local, state,
and international levels to advance democracy
and improve civic participation of the Belarusian
people in building a new democratic society. The
Centre conducts peer education training programs
on children’s rights and civic responsibilities for
students and civic activists and publishes online
materials on school self-government systems in
countries in transition.
Institute for Governance and Development
(IGD) is an independent civil society organization
in Nepal committed to enhancing the capacity of
both the citizens and public sphere institutions to
engage together to build a just and democratic society through appropriate institutional and procedural choices and behaviors. It strives for achievement
of equity, justice, inclusion and transformation with
a preponderant focus on citizen participation and
empowerment with a view to contribute towards
deepening democracy, strengthening participatory
governance and progressive realization of justice
for peace and positive transformation of the society.
The Institute for Democracy Education –
Ghana (IDE-Ghana) is an independent, nonpartisan, non-profit and public policy oriented organization that is dedicated to the promotion of democracy education and good governance in Ghana
Since 1987, the International Foundation for
Electoral Systems (IFES) has worked in over 135
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 143
countries, and promotes the participation of youth
as engaged citizens in an increasingly globalized
world. IFES’ work with youth focuses on the inclusion, leadership and public service of young people
through programming implemented in an interactive, targeted manner designed to fit local contexts.
IFES has found that youth civic education programming is crucial to a country’s democratic health; a
culture of democracy exists only when citizens are
informed about democratic principles and translate
that knowledge to action through community service and leadership. In a number of countries, IFES
has developed formal civic education curricula at
secondary-, and tertiary-levels. Informal civic education programs are also a key component of IFES’
portfolio in this area. By engaging young people
outside of the classroom they have a greater opportunity to contribute to the design of the program,
thus transforming youth from passive recipients of
development programming to dynamic agents for
change in their communities.
democracy and civic studies higher up on the agenda of the education system. IDI runs pilot programs
throughout Israel that aim to deepen and expand
the education for democracy. The IDI also produces
three booklets, including a multi-stage educational
curriculum on democratic principles and a guide
for civics teachers to equip them with background
materials relevant to civic education as well as the
“Constitution by Consensus” project.
Kerekasztal Színház’s (Round Table Theatre)
mission is to give people the opportunity to explore
and understand the most relevant questions of our
time through artistic work. Most importantly, they
are improving active democracy and social responsibility. In this mission, the focus is on the Theatre
in Education program. TIE programs are offered
for youth from ages six to 18. Kerekasztal Színház
believes that youth is the future.
The center for International Projects in
Education (IPE) offers education-oriented services to governmental and non-governmental institutions in developing and transforming countries.
IPE concentrates on the areas of school and democracy; teaching and learning; and governance, and it
contributes to democracy promotion and the fight
against poverty. The aim of IPE is capacity building
abroad as well as at home at the Zurich University
of Teacher Education (PH Zurich). The knowledge
of PH Zurich experts makes an important contribution to the education projects of IPE. The international exchange arising from projects enables lecturers of the PH Zurich to deepen their knowledge
in national as well as international contexts.
Osnovna šola Gornja Radgona, Slovenia, is the
only primary school in a little town (3200 inhabitants) by the Austrian border (520 pupils from 6
– 15 and 70 teachers). The school plays an active
role in the local community by organizing various
extracurricular activities and events and promotes
environmental awareness, intercultural values and
human rights. Our pupils take part in the School
Children’s Parliament and in the Students’ Council
where their class representatives can express their
opinion of school politics and actively participate
in decision making of school process. Four years
ago, a local school for children with special needs
and handicapped children moved into our school
building. They have been integrated in our school
life equally and the relationship among the children
has largely improved in accepting differences.
The Israel Democracy Institute (IDI) is an
independent, non-partisan research institute whose
objective is to play an important role in placing
The Pontis Foundation, a Slovakia-based civil
society organization, works to transform and
strengthen democracy in Slovak society. Pontis orga-
144 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education
nizes a citizen education program during national
elections to encourage citizen participation in the
public policy process.
Presencia Foundation is a non-profit nongovernmental organization that works in pursue of a
greater social welfare by strengthening the exercise
of a competent, active and supportive citizenry.
The Foundation has concentrated its efforts in
the making and implementation of programs and
pedagogical materials for the democratic formation
of children, youth, and the community in general,
strengthening the formation of honest and respectful citizens.
St. Petersburg Institute of Law named after
Prince P.G. Oldenburgsky is one of the first Russian
non-governmental law schools, founded in 1992
in St. Petersburg, Russia. Today the Institute is the
resource and training center in the areas of clinical legal education, professional development of
lawyers and trainers. The Institute is also a center
for civic education, national partner of the RussianAmerican program Civitas-Russia. Since 1996, the
Institute is implementing the Living Law/Street
Law project, providing a wide range of activities in
law-related, citizen, human rights, and democracy
education. and insights, which they can use to effect positive
change for the rest of their lives.
Via Education is a non-profit organization based
in Mexico, and its mission is to generate opportunities for sustainable social development through
the design, implementation, and evaluation of educational strategies. This mission is fulfilled through
four main research areas: quality education, education for democratic citizenship, education policy,
and social responsibility. Its primary focus has
been the strengthening of quality education and
life opportunities for children in underprivileged
conditions, particularly in the field of education for
democratic citizenship.
Visible Congress - Visible Candidates of the
Department of Political Science at the University
of Los Andes in Bogotá, Colombia, is working on a
project called “Visible School Governments” to foster change in the civic behavior of youth, improve
the quality of student representation, and generate
awareness about the importance of permanent communication between the people and its representatives. Through this civic education project, Visible
Congress - Visible Candidates hopes to foster a certain sense of belonging and civic participation that
can strengthen the democratic culture of Colombia.
Street Law, Inc. creates classroom and community programs that teach people about law, democracy, and human rights worldwide. Our accessible,
engaging, and interactive programs empower students and communities to become active, legally-savvy contributors to society. Most of our efforts
are focused on providing teachers, law students,
lawyers, and other volunteers with the curricula, resources, and support they need to become
effective Street Law educators—enabling us to
expand our reach nationwide and globally. Street
Law participants benefit from “real life” lessons
Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education 145
UN Resolution on Education for Democracy
Co-sponsored by: Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, El Salvador, Finland, Germany, Hungary, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Mongolia, Netherlands, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Sweden, United States of America
and Uruguay
The General Assembly,
Reaffirming the Charter of the United Nations, including the principles
and purposes contained therein, and recognizing that human rights,
the rule of law and democracy are interlinked and mutually reinforcing
and that they belong to the universal and indivisible core values and
principles of the United Nations,
peace, development and the promotion and protection of all human
rights and fundamental freedoms, which are interdependent and mutually reinforcing;
Reaffirming also the right of everyone to education, which is enshrined
in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention
on the Rights of the Child, the Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Discrimination against Women, the Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities and in other relevant instruments,
3. Encourages the Secretary-General, United Nations agencies such as
the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization,
the United Nations Children’s Fund, the United Nations Population
Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and the United
Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women,
and other relevant stakeholders to strengthen their efforts to promote
the values of peace, human rights, democracy, respect for religious and
cultural diversity and justice through education;
Recalling the plan of action for the second phase (2010-2014) of the
World Programme for Human Rights Education,
Reaffirming that democracy is a universal value based on the freely expressed
will of the people to determine their own political, economic, social and cultural systems and their full participation in all aspects of their lives,
Recalling the United Nations Millennium Declaration wherein the
Member States committed themselves to sparing no effort to promote
democracy and strengthen the rule of law, as well as respect for all
internationally recognized human rights and fundamental freedoms,
including the right to development, and resolved to respect fully and
uphold the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to strive for the full
protection and promotion in all countries of civil, political, economic,
social and cultural rights for all and to strengthen the capacity of all
countries to implement the principles and practices of democracy and
respect for human rights, including minority rights,
Recognizing that while democracies share common features, there is no
single model of democracy and that it does not belong to any country
or region,
Mindful of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action of the
World Conference on Human Rights, the World Plan of Action
on Education for Human Rights and Democracy adopted by the
International Congress on Education for Human Rights and Democracy,
the World Programme for Human Rights Education proclaimed by the
General Assembly in its resolution 59/113 A of 10 December 2004
and the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Education and
Training,
Recalling with appreciation the establishment of the United Nations
Democracy Fund and the efforts of the Fund to advance the United
Nations democracy agenda as well as the operational activities in
support of democratization processes carried out by the United
Nations system, including by the Department of Political Affairs of the
Secretariat, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for
Human Rights and the United Nations Development Programme,
Acknowledging the role of international, regional and other intergovernmental organizations in support of democracy,
Recognizing that education is key to the strengthening of democratic
institutions, the realization of human rights and the achievement
of all international development goals, including the Millennium
Development Goals, the development of human potential, poverty
alleviation and the fostering of greater understanding among peoples,
1. Reaffirms the fundamental link between democratic governance,
2. Takes note of the Education First initiative launched by the SecretaryGeneral on 26 September 2012, in particular its third priority area,
“fostering global citizenship”;
4. Strongly encourages Member States to integrate education for democracy, along with civic education and human rights education, into
national education standards and to develop and strengthen national
and subnational programmes, curricula and curricular and extracurricular educational activities aimed at the promotion and consolidation
of democratic values and democratic governance and human rights,
taking into account innovative approaches and best practices in the
field, in order to facilitate citizens’ empowerment and participation in
political life and policymaking at all levels;
5. Invites United Nations agencies, funds and programmes, including
the United Nations Democracy Fund, the United Nations Development
Programme, the United Nations Children’s Fund, the Office of the
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, to provide
appropriate expertise and resources for the development of relevant
educational programmes and materials for democracy;
6. Encourages international, regional and other intergovernmental organizations, within their respective mandates, to share their best experiences and practices in the field of education for democracy, including
but not limited to civic education, with each other and with the United
Nations system, as appropriate;
7. Invites the Special Rapporteur on the right to education to seek,
in close cooperation with Member States, the views of Governments,
United Nations agencies and programmes, civil society and other relevant United Nations mandate holders in order that he may include
in his next report to the General Assembly at the sixty-ninth session
an update on the efforts of Member States in the field of education for
democracy;
8. Decides to continue its consideration of the issue of education for
democracy at its sixty-ninth session, under the agenda item entitled
“Integrated and coordinated implementation of and follow-up to the
outcomes of the major United Nations conferences and summits in the
economic, social and related fields”;
9. Invites Governments, agencies and organizations of the United
Nations system and intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations to intensify their efforts to promote education for democracy,
and requests the Secretary-General, within existing reporting obligations, to report to the General Assembly at its sixty-ninth session on
the implementation of the present resolution.
146 Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education