Conference Agenda

This symposium will focus on education for democracy in the age of global digitality. On an empirical basis, we will ask how democracy and education for democracy are understood by teachers and learners, what meaning they attribute to it and what this means for teaching and learning in schools in their orientation towards the future. Particular attention will be paid to revealing the contextuality of these understandings and, by looking at the different perspectives together, to uncovering a common core for the further development of democracy-promoting education under conditions of glocality (Robertson, 1995). A unifying element for all contributions is their localisation within the horizon of global digitality (Grünberger, 2022; Stalder, 2017). This provides a common reference point for reflecting on the empirical findings, namely on the potential of digitality for the democracy-promoting education. With its various contributions, the symposium aims to provide suggestions for the democracy-promoting education in the context of digitality, which can develop relevance for different contexts.

The often described crisis of democracy (Abramowitz, 2018) is a global challenge for school education. Crisis and threat have different contextual manifestations: Some are political developments such as the rise of populist parties or the observed increase in autocratic forms of governance, others are socio-cultural developments such as the dominance of an isolated individualism in the age of performance (Ball, 2003). All of these developments are being significantly accelerated by the shift to the digital realm, undermining democratic consensus. These challenges to deliberative democracy are faced with problems that, because of their complexity, require the participation of as many people as possible in order to address them in a way that is based on justice (Culp, 2019), in a society that is as stable as possible. This applies to the climate crisis as well as the equitable distribution of resources and goods, issues of intergenerational sustainability, and peacekeeping and conflict mitigation. Democratic consultation and decision-making processes are needed. Democratic education will not be able to solve the (global) social problems per se, but as a stimulus for the development of democratic skills, it is an indispensable prerequisite for their possibility (Honneth, 2015).

The symposium will explore the possibilities of promoting democratic education in schools in different contexts and from different perspectives. This plurality is essential for two reasons: First, comparative reflections allow the identification of a core that can be more clearly summarised due to its emerging variability. This makes it possible to answer the question of how to conceptualise a context-independent education that promotes democracy. Secondly, all contexts are characterised by common conditions such as globality and digitality and by the same abstract challenges (global justice, inclusion), which in turn requires a high degree of abstraction (Scheunpflug, 2019; Scheunpflug & Schröck, 2000, 2002). The specific design of educational processes that promote democracy will therefore have similarities. According to our common hypothesis, democracy education can be better understood if a deeper understanding of the relationship between context-specific (e.g. the specific political system or the specific demographic situation) and context-independent aspects (digitality, peacekeeping) can be achieved. In this respect, the symposium can also be seen as an intervention against nationally reduced concepts and curricula of democracy-promoting education in the globalised (world) society.

The symposium will present studies from different contexts (Tanzania, Cameroon, Nigeria, Germany, Ghana). In a short introduction, the connection between digitality and globality as well as teaching and learning will be outlined, it will be explained in terms of epistemic challenges. This introduction provides the framework for the empirical analysis of issues of democracy education in migration societies and in societies with precarious democratic development.

This quantitative study explores school actors’ understanding of democracy and civic education in non-democratic countries. Thereby, the article builds on the assumption that teachers are a crucial factor in the success of learning in general (Hattie, 2003) and that their (pedagogical) beliefs influence their teaching practices (Knowles, 2018; Reichert et al., 2021). Not only because of their role model function, their pro-democratic attitudes and values are the linchpin in the implementation of democracy education (Große Prues, 2022, p. 17). Although a large number of studies have already contributed to this discourse (Chin & Barber, 2010; Reichert & Torney-Purta, 2019), there is a research desideratum with regard to the Global South in general and Sub-Saharan Africa in particular, where the majority of countries are still autocracies. In addition, many of these contexts are characterized by very different access to IT and internet connection. This applies especially to schools. In Tanzania, which serves as a case for this study, internet penetration in 2023 was only 31.6%, whilst 86.4% of the total population had access to cellular mobile connection. Especially mobile internet connection had increased by almost 8% compared 2022 (DataReportal, 2023). Given that internet connection comes along with increased access to information, this development bears a potential to generate informed citizens, which are a prerequisite for a well-functioning democracy. At the same time, the spread of fake news is only one example for how increasing digitalization can challenge democracy. Moreover, in Tanzania all materials used for teaching actually need to be officially recognized by the Tanzanian institute of Education. This paper presents findings of a study based on the survey instruments of the International Civic and Citizenship Education Study (ICCS) 2016 (cf. Schulz et al., 2016) on Tanzanian teachers’ and principals’ attitudes towards democracy and digitalization. As a result, 85% of the respondents answered that obtaining news through the Internet, television, newspaper, etc. is part of their daily life. Also, 63% believed that following political issues is “very important” for being a “good citizen.” At the same time more than one third replied that their students analyze information gathered from multiple sources including online research. Therefore, the question raises whether how a democratic dealing with the potential and threats of digitalization can be fostered when access to digital means limited. Based on this, I will address the role of information and knowledge for democracy.

References Chin, K., & Barber, C. E. (2010). A Multi-Dimensional Exploration of Teachers' Beliefs About Civic Education in Australia, England, and the United States. Theory & Research in Social Education, 38(3), 395–427. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2010.10473432 DataReportal. (2023). Digital 2023: Tanzania. https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2023-tanzania Große Prues, P. (2022). Demokratie-Erziehung als Querschnittsaufgabe: Eine Studie zu Subjektiven Theorien von Lehrkräften. Studien zur Professionsforschung und Lehrerbildung. Verlag Julius Klinkhardt. https://elibrary.utb.de/doi/book/10.35468/9783781559615 Hattie, J. (2003). Teachers Make a Difference: What is the research evidence? Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). ACER Research Conference, Melbourne, Australia. http://research.acer.edu.au/research_conference_2003/4/ Knowles, R. T. (2018). Teaching Who You Are: Connecting Teachers’ Civic Education Ideology to Instructional Strategies. Theory & Research in Social Education, 46(1), 68–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2017.1356776 Reichert, F., Lange, D., & Chow, L. (2021). Educational beliefs matter for classroom instruction: A comparative analysis of teachers’ beliefs about the aims of civic education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 98, 103248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103248 Reichert, F., & Torney-Purta, J. (2019). A cross-national comparison of teachers' beliefs about the aims of civic education in 12 countries: A person-centered analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 77, 112–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.09.005

This article examines the experiences of Christian Church leaders about the contribution of peace education in Nigerian faith-based schools as a basis for a just and democratic society. The mitigating role of education during an ongoing conflict is pertinent, yet curiously under-researched (Davies, 2005). In conflict and challenging democratic context, peace and transformative education is argued to be appropriate as it challenges pedagogy that is rooted in hierarchical forms of power but rather seek to respond to democratic participation, freedom and social justice that surmount national limits (Basedau, 2023, p. 1, Magro, 2015, p. 109). Even though peace education understanding is complex, its overarching questions address inequality gaps, democratic processes of dealing with conflict and issues of global social justice (Jäger, 2015). There is however little empirical research about peace education in Sub-Saharan Africa that is hit by conflicts (Njobati, 2021), however existing studies mainly address wars, unstable governments and economy (Brunori et al., 2019, Babajide et al., 2021). For instance, little is known about the conflict in the Middle Belt region of Nigeria and its effects on education where schools have been attacked and children forced out of schools with girls violated (Opara & Inmpey, 2019, p.109). Meanwhile, Christian Church organizations are playing an important role in conflict resolution and peace education (Ilo, 2015, p. 99). This paper explores how peace education activities in the faith-based education sector in Nigeria is shaping learning conditions. The qualitative research was conducted in the Middle Belt region and included 13 semi-structured interviews with leaders of Roman Catholic and Protestant churches. Findings show the two-sided nature of the relationship between conflict and schooling. On the one hand, peace clubs in schools offer safe spaces for mediation. On the other hand, everyday school life is still characterized by social feedback that stir conflict. Moreover, peace education pays little attention to the conditions of learning. Aspects such as good learning climate, critical thinking and cooperative learning which have been identified by research as key elements of peace education (Burde et al., 2017, p. 620; Bajaj, 2015, p. 1-2), do not feature in the pedagogical framework of the schools. The paper concludes that further professional development for educational leaders is needed to enhance schools’ role in contributing to justice and peace education as a landscape of shaping safe learning spaces in conflict context.

Babajide, A., Ahmad, A. H., & Coleman, S. (2021). Violent conflicts and state capacity: Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Government and Economics, 3, 100019. Bajaj, M. (2015). “Pedagogies of resistance” and critical peace education praxis. Journal of Peace Education, 12(2), 154–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/17400201.20 14.991914. Basedau, M. (2023). Under pressure: Democratisation trends in Sub-Saharan Africa. Brunori, P., Palmisano, F., & Peragine, V. (2019). Inequality of opportunity in sub-Saharan Africa. Applied Economics, 51(60), 6428-6458. Burde, D., Kapit, A., Wahl, R. L., Guven, O., & Skarpeteig, M. I. (2017). Education in emergencies: A review of theory and research. Review of Educational Research, 87(3), 619-658. Ilo, P. (2015). Faith-based Organisations and conflict resolution in Nigeria: The case of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN). Journal of Global Initiatives: Policy, Pedagogy, Perspective, 9(2), 9. Jäger, U. (2015). Peace education and conflict transformation. Berghof Foundation Operations GmbH. Njobati, F. F. (2021). Shaping resilience through peace education in schools: results from a case study in Nigeria. Zeitschrift für internationale Bildungsforschung und Entwicklungspädagogik, 44(4), 25-31. Opara, S. C. & Inmpey, J. C. (2019). Open–grazing in the Middle Belt region Nigeria: Implications for sustainable development. Sapientia Global Journal of Arts, Humanities and Development Studies, 2(2), 106–116.

With empirical data from Madagascar, Cameroun and further Sub-Saharan countries we ask for opportunities that arise from digitalisation for democracy-promoting education in the global horizon. Our question overarches four sub-questions, namely 1. What are the experiences of school leaders and those responsible for partnerships with school partnerschips and how do they relate them to the democracy-promoting education? 2. What ideas can be identified for the localisation in a digital global society? 3. What digital opportunities and resources are used in the context of South-North partnerships? 4. What supporting and adverse factors can be identified for the practice of South-North partnerships? In this project, we theoretically presuppose the fact of digitality (Stalder, 2017) in the global society (Luhmann, 1982) for all contexts. At the same time, we assume that digitality is realised locally, in different traditions, with different resources and under different political conditions. We are therefore dealing with a glocal phenomenon (Robertson, 1995). From a pedagogical perspective, we draw on research on learning democracy, which increasingly emphasises democratic experiences and emotions beyond the mere transfer of knowledge about democratic rules and values. There are also claims for reflection democracy-promoting education on a transnational level (Culp, 2019). Other scholars ask for relating digital education to democracy and citizenship (Choi & Cristol, 2021; Knowles et al., 2023). We also draw on research on South-North partnerships, in which their embedding in processes of reflection can be identified as a condition for sustainability (Krogull & Scheunpflug, 2013; Jääskeläinen, 2015; Bourn & Cara, 2012). Based on the qualitative content analysis of group discussions (n=7) and interviews (n=10), we can show the following results. Material resources and, in some cases, political constellations make it difficult to sustain South-North partnerships that can stimulate educational processes that promote democracy. In addition, there are different attitudes to the opportunities offered by digitality, a spectrum of understandings of democracy and the need for curricular harmonisation. On the other hand, we can formulate the following chances deriving from South-North-partnerships: By engaging with an external perspective, the understanding of democracy in its complexity is enhanced for all participants. Participants acquire skills to articulate and reflect on their own involvement in an educational and political culture. The practical use of digitality becomes more complex and accessible for reflection.

Bourn, D., & Cara, O. (2012). Evaluating partners in development: Contribution of international school partnerships to education and development. In Research Paper (Vol. 5). London: Development Education Research Centre. Choi, M., & Cristol, D. (2021). Digital citizenship with intersectionality lens: Towards participatory democracy driven digital citizenship education. Theory into Practice, 60(4), 361-370. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2021.1987094 Culp, J. (2019). Democratic Education in a Globalized World: A Normative Theory. Taylor & Francis. Jääskeläinen, L. (2015). Learning in, about and for development partnerships. What Competences Does a Global Citizen Need for Building a Development Partnership? In. Knowles, R. T., Camicia, S., & Nelson, L. (2023). Education for Democracy in the Social Media Century [Academic Journal Report]. Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 8(2), 21-36. Krogull, S., & Scheunpflug, A. (2013). Citizenship-Education durch internationale Begegnungen im Nord-Süd-Kontext? Empirische Befunde aus einem DFG-Projekt zu Begegnungsreisen in Deutschland, Ruanda und Bolivien. ZSE Zeitschrift für Soziologie der Erziehung und Sozialisation(3), 231-248. https://doi.org/10.3262/ZSE1303231 Luhmann, N. (1982). The Differentiation of Society. Columbia University Press. Robertson, R. (1995). Glocalization: Time-Space and Homogeneity-Heterogeneity. In M. Featherstone, S. Lash, & R. Robertson (Hrsg.), Global Modernities (S. 25-44). Sage Publications. Stalder, F. (2017). The Digital Condition. John Wiley & Sons.

Democracy and social justice increasingly play out in the digital context as digital ‘technology is already embedded in, and entangled with, existing social practices and economic and political systems’ (Knox, 2019: 3). Digital technology is increasingly prevalent in schools across the world and is often positioned, by policy, as a means to close attainment gaps (Scottish Government, 2016) and ‘level the field of opportunity for students’ (US Department of Education, 2017). This suggests that digital technology has a key role to play in relation to equity, justice, and inclusion, to education for democracy. However, digital technology has been observed to ‘exacerbate pre-existing inequalities, establish new ones and further marginalise communities’ (Hall et. al., 2020: 436). Student-teachers need to be prepared to navigate digital spaces, digital spaces which are susceptible to manipulation. Democracy and global citizenship increasingly play out online where filter bubbles (Berners-Lee, 2014), algorithms (Tufekci, 2016) and corporations (Bollier, 2010) manipulate what is accessed. Understanding how digital tools and spaces inform student-teachers knowledge and understanding, and the development of their pedagogic beliefs, is therefore a pertinent concern. In Scotland, a democratic European country, school education is informed by professional values which espouse social justice and sustainability. Scottish education works on a presumption of inclusion (Scottish Government, 2019) with research, teacher-education and professional development promoting inclusive pedagogy (Florian, 2016). In this research study the professional development of student-teachers, during a one-year Professional Graduate Diploma in Education (PGDE) teaching qualification was observed, with consideration of the digitised context of the 21st century. The programme which the student-teachers were enrolled onto had been recently redesigned to support the student-teachers journey towards becoming agentive professionals; with the development of a digital portfolio to support praxis (connecting theory and practice) on placement, and a re-designed assessment structure which provided multiple opportunities for professional dialogue and collaboration. The research applied a thematic approach analysing qualitative data which included interviews, surveys, visual mapping, and learning artefacts. Analysis observed how the local was situated in the global. Digital technology ‘nudged’ practice, promoting small changes at a local level which reflected global discourses of neo-liberalism and accountability (Peters, 2020). As education moves into an era where digital technologies are increasingly ‘embedded across everyday aspects of teachers work’ (Starkey, 2020: 49) it is important that we, as teacher-educators, are aware of the ways in which the digital context impacts student-teachers professional development.

Bollier, D. 2010. ‘The Promise and Peril of Big Data’ Community and Society Program Report on the Eighteenth Annual Aspen Institute Roundtable on Information Technology, The Aspen Institute: Washington DC Hall, J., Roman, C., Jovel-Arias, C., & Young, C. 2020. Pre-service teachers examine digital equity amidst schools' COVID-19 responses. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 28(2), 435-442. Knox, J., 2019. What Does the ‘Postdigital’ Mean for Education? Three Critical Perspectives on the Digital, with Implications for Educational Research and Practice. Postdigital Science and Education. 1 (1). pp.1-14. Peters, M.A., 2020. An educational theory of innovation: What constitutes the educational good?. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 52(10), pp.1016-1022. Scottish Government. 2016. Enhancing Learning and Teaching through the use of Digital Technology (ISBN:9781786524737). Learning Directorate. Scottish Government. https://www.gov.scot/publications/enhancing-learning-teaching-through-use-digital-technology/ Starkey, L. 2020. A review of research exploring teacher preparation for the digital age. Cambridge Journal of Education, 50(1), 37-56. US Department of Education. (2017). Reimagining the role of technology in education: 2017 national education technology plan update. Office of Educational Technology. https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/NETP17.pdf