Abstract
This paper calls into questions some assumptions about citizenship which are more or less taken for granted in academic, political
and social contexts. Such assumptions include: That there is a clearly defined conceptual link between citizenship and the
identity of citizens. That conceptions of citizenship – and, therefore, of citizenship education – inevitably vary from one cultural
context to another; That the values underpinning citizenship are public or objective; and That the concept of citizenship has moral or ethical connotations which justify the inclusion of citizenship (or civics) education in school curricula; I argue that with respect
to individuals, matters of identity are not directly tied to citizenship or to any other “collectivist” conception. Instead,
these identity conditions are grounded in the actual concept of person, and are best construed in relational terms.
and social contexts. Such assumptions include: That there is a clearly defined conceptual link between citizenship and the
identity of citizens. That conceptions of citizenship – and, therefore, of citizenship education – inevitably vary from one cultural
context to another; That the values underpinning citizenship are public or objective; and That the concept of citizenship has moral or ethical connotations which justify the inclusion of citizenship (or civics) education in school curricula; I argue that with respect
to individuals, matters of identity are not directly tied to citizenship or to any other “collectivist” conception. Instead,
these identity conditions are grounded in the actual concept of person, and are best construed in relational terms.
- Content Type Journal Article
- Pages 1-21
- DOI 10.1007/s11115-012-0183-x
- Authors
- Laurance J. Splitter, Hong Kong Institute of Education, Tai Po, Hong Kong
- Journal Public Organization Review
- Online ISSN 1573-7098
- Print ISSN 1566-7170