The IEA Civic Education Study
Judith Torney-Purta
University of Maryland
In 1993 the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (Amsterdam) initiated a Civic Education Study to examine relevant policy and student outcomes in the areas of knowledge, concepts and attitudes among adolescents in nearly 30 countries. Phase 1 has used qualitative methods (interviews with experts, analysis of documents including textbooks, and focus groups) to study what students are expected to learn about their nation and citizenship (inside and outside school). Phase 2 uses quantitative methods (a test and survey built on the model and standards of IEA studies in other subject areas, such as the Third International Mathematics and Science Study known as TIMSS) that are administered to nationally representative samples.
The countries participating in one or both phases include Australia, Belgium (French speaking), Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Chinese Taipei, Colombia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, England, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Hungary, Israel, Italy, :Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Rumania, Russia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United States.
The first volume from the first phase has just been published, Civic Education Across Countries: Twenty-four National Case Studies from the IEA Civic Education Project, edited by Judith Torney-Purta, John Schwille, and Jo-Ann Amadeo. The data collected during Phase 1 of this study summarize what panels of diverse experts in each participating country believe that 14-year-olds should know about
eighteen topics including elections, individual rights, national identity, political participation, organizations which characterize civil society, relations of economics to politics, and respect for ethnic and political diversity. It is impossible to briefly summarize this 622page book and the extensive additional documentation submitted, but a few conclusions are of interest.
First, there is a common core of content topics across countries in civic education in these countries (which are established or transitional democracies). Second, there is considerable unani9mity across countries in the belief that civic education should be cross-disciplinary, participative, interactive, related to life, conducted in a non-authoritarian environment, cognizant of the challenges of societal diversity, and co-constructed by schools, parents and the community
(and non-governmental organizations). Third, there is widely perceived to be a gap between the goals for democracy expressed in the curriculum, and the reality of the society and school. There is also a gap when there are long lists of factual knowledge to be conveyed but only an hour or two a week for their study. Fourth, although educators often seek to make students aware of both the excitement of the political process and the importance of participation, students themselves often show a general disdain for politics. Fifth, diversity socio-economic, racial, ethnic, and linguistic) is a matter of tremendous concern in all these countries without much sense of the best direction to take in the community or the school.
Based upon the analysis of Phase 1 material three domains were chosen for focus in Phase 2 of the study.
Domain I: Democracy: What does democracy mean and what are its associated institutions and practices (including constitutions, rights and obligations of citizens)?
Domain II: National Identity, Regional and International
Relationships: How can the sense of national identity or national
loyalty among young people be described and how does it relate to
their orientation to other countries and to international and regional
organizations (i.e., the European Union)?Domain III: Social Cohesion and Diversity: What issues of
social cohesion and diversity are important; what do they mean to
young people?
The following types of student outcome measures for the Phase 2 test/survey have been developed:
..Item types 1 and 2 form a 38-item test of cognitive
knowledge and skills...Items of type 3 in the survey measure concepts of
democracy, citizenship, and the scope of government. These items do
not have correct answer keys...Items of type 4 in the survey measure attitudes such as those
relating to norms of respect and the opportunity structure for ethnic and
immigrant groups and for women, national and international attitudes,
trust in institutions, and political efficacy...Items of type 5 in the survey measure expected participatory
actions relating to politics...A final part of the student survey assesses students' perceptions of the
climate of the classroom, their efficacy at school, their organizational
participation, and background variables.
During Phase 2, nationally representative samples of students are being tested with this civic education instrument requiring two class periods to complete. Fourteen-year-olds from nearly thirty countries are expected to participate in this testing between now and October 1999. Approximately 140,000 students will respond to tests and surveys, along with a sample of teachers.
A report of some of the comparative results will be released in early February 2001 with other volumes published early in 2002 (dependent upon funding). It is expected that the data will be released on the Web for use by the social science research community in October 2002.
