A Systematic Literature Review for
Conceptualization of Citizenship and Citizenship Education
Zeinab Yazdizadeh
University of Eastern Finland, Philosophical Faculty School of Educational Sciences and Psychology Master’s Degree Program in
Learning, Teaching and Counselling in Intercultural Context (Adult Education, LLL)
Spring 2021
ITÄ-SUOMEN YLIOPISTO – UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND
Tiedekunta – Faculty Philosophical Faculty
Osasto – School
School of Educational Sciences and Psychology Tekijät – Author
Zeinab Yazdizadeh Työn nimi – Title
A Systematic Literature Review for Conceptualization of Citizenship and Citizenship Education Pääaine – Main subject
Education Työn laji – Level
Master’s thesis
Päivämäärä – Date
1.06.2021
Sivumäärä – Number of pages 180
Abstract
Migratory movements affected by globalization have led to the advancement of cultural plurality and the evolution of hybrid identities which creates a condition of superdiversity. This makes the notion of citi- zenship to be more complex and multilayered than before. In addition, citizenship education as an essen- tial for social cohesion and inclusion in modern democratic societies should be very considerate to the matters relevant to rights and pluralism. Literature on citizenship and citizenship education is so broad and complicated that a literature review is required to provide fundamental knowledge of the research concepts and background which can informatively and supportively provide a context for further research.
This research as a systematic literature review has investigated the meaning and definition of citizenship as a contested, multilayered topic, also the methods and considerations for citizenship education. Content analysis and conceptual analysis of the data offered various findings relevant to these two questions.
Addressing citizenship as a four-dimensional concept (legal status, rights, participation, and identity), with high interconnectedness between the dimensions, is essential to prevent the formation of stratified citizenship and establishment of full citizenship. This can be employed as an ideal type which serves as an analytic and reflective tool in research work in this field.
Perspectives of different thinkers throughout the history of citizenship and citizenship education, and various forms of citizenship education can be considered as the research findings which can create a basic insight towards the issue of citizenship education. In addition, the research findings indicate that “trans- formative citizenship”, “multicultural citizenship”, and “public pedagogy” have a lot to indicate about citizenship education considerations and provisions in the era of migration.
Based on the discussions around these notions the research offers some suggestions which requires crea- tivity and rethinking adult education beyond the hegemonic view of lifelong learning current policies and invite the educators to consider the importance of politics of citizenship more than before.
Some recommendations are also offered for further research.
Keywords
citizenship, citizenship education, immigrants, adult education, transformative citizenship, multicultural citizenship, public pedagogy
Content
1 Introduction: The Importance of Citizenship and Citizenship Education and Problem Definition ... 8
2 Key Concepts Determining Citizenship and Citizenship Education... 13
2.1 Democracy as a Key Value for Citizenship ... 13
2.2 Social Justice as a Key Value for Citizenship ... 16
3 Methodology ... 18
3.1 The Aims of the Study and Research Questions ... 18
3.2 Systematic Review as the Research Method ... 18
3.2.1 Data and Data Collection ... 19
3.2.2 Data Analysis ... 24
3.3 Research Quality ... 32
3.3.1 Methodological Strategy for Enhancing Credibility ... 32
3.3.2 Self-Evaluation of the Research Based on a Qualitative Quality Model ... 34
4 Findings Relevant to the First Research Question: Meaning of Citizenship ... 38
4.1 A short History of Citizenship: From the city state of Athens to the Marshallian citizenship .... 38
4.2 The Marshallian Theory of Citizenship and it’s Critiques... 42
4.3 Philosophical-political Traditions Leading Definitions of Citizenship ... 45
4.4 Dimensions of Citizenship ... 47
4.4.1 Membership and Identity ... 48
4.4.2 Legal Status ... 49
4.4.3 Rights ... 50
4.4.4 Participation ... 50
4.5 Mutuality Between Dimensions of Citizenship ... 52
4.6 Contemporary Transformations in Citizenship ... 54
4.6.1 The cultural turn in citizenship studies ... 54
4.6.2 The global turn in citizenship studies ... 56
4.6.3 Decentering of Citizenship ... 57
4.7 Typologies for Citizenships and Citizens’ Participation: Towards Citizenship Education ... 61
4.7.1 Typology of Citizenship by Westheimer and Kahne ... 62
4.7.2 Maximal/Minimal, Thick/Thin Interpretations for Levels of Citizenship and Citizenship Education ... 64
4.7.3 Banks’s Typology for Deeper Citizenship and Some Comparisons ... 67
4.7.4 Banks’s Citizenship Typology Addressing Justice and Equality ... 69
4.7.5 Final Comparisons and Conclusion ... 72
5 Findings Relevant to the Second Research Question: Citizenship Education ... 76
5.1 Foundational Thinkers of Citizenship and Citizenship Education ... 76
5.1.1 Confucian Conception of Citizenship Education (551-479 BC) ... 77
5.1.2 Aristotle on Citizenship and Civic Education (384-322 BC) ... 77
5.1.3 Rousseau on Citizenship and Education (1712-1778) ... 79
5.1.4 Dewey and Citizenship Education (1859-1952) ... 80
5.1.5 Arendt, Citizenship, and Education (1906-1975) ... 82
5.1.6 Rawls and Political Liberalism (1921-2002) ... 84
5.1.7 Paulo Freire: Citizenship and Education (1921-1997) ... 85
5.2 Citizenship Education: Different Forms and Descriptions ... 88
5.2.1 Character Education ... 88
5.2.2 Peace Education ... 91
5.2.3 Global Education ... 95
5.2.4 Human Rights Education ... 98
5.2.5 Civic Education ... 104
5.2.6 Active Citizenship ... 108
5.3 Education for Transformative Citizenship ... 113
5.3.1 School and Transformative Curriculum Orientation ... 114
5.3.2 Adult Education and Transformative Citizenship ... 116
5.3.3 Addressing and Transforming the Most Basic Political Emotion ... 120
5.4 Multicultural Citizenship Education ... 122
5.4.1 Assimilationist Citizenship Education and Identity Issues ... 122
5.4.2 Schools’ Contribution to Multiculturalism... 128
5.5 Public Pedagogy ... 131
5.5.1 Biesta’s Typology of Public Pedagogy as a Programmatic Understanding ... 132
5.5.2 Connecting Political and Educational ... 135
5.5.3 A Hospitable Imagination of Diversity and Difference ... 138
5.5.4 Extending the Three Approaches of Biesta: A richness of different educational practices 148 6 Conclusions ... 149
6.1 Summary of Findings ... 150
6.1.1 Meaning of Citizenship ... 150
6.1.2 Citizenship Education ... 152
6.2 Discussion ... 157
6.3 Recommendations ... 162
References ... 164
List of Tables
Table 1: Two Approaches to Social Justice (Tyson & Park, 2008) ... 17
Table 2: Summary of search description ... 20
Table 3: Final themes and the relevant included articles ... 31
Table 4: A summary of the historical transformation on the notion of citizenship between 16th-20th century ... 41
Table 5: Main philosophical-political traditions leading the conceptualization of citizenship ... 47
Table 6: Kinds of Citizens (Westheimer & Kahne, 2003) ... 62
Table 7: Framework of Citizenship Participation (First column: McLauglin, cited in Wood et.al, 2013, p.86; Second column Westheimer and Kahne, cited in Wood et.al, 2013, p.86) ... 64
Table 8: Theoretical Typology of Citizenship Education for and with Cyclists: Instrumental, Interpretive, and Critical Epistemological Perspectives (Heggart and Flowers, 2020) ... 67
Table 9: Citizenship Typology: Failed, Recognized, Participatory, and Transformative (Banks, 2017a) . 70 Table 10: Freire’s Definitions of Banking and Problem-posing Education (Kester & Aryoubi, 2020) ... 86
Table 11: The emphasis on citizens’ dispositions and citizenship education considerations citizenship education by eminent thinkers of the field ... 87
Table 12: Comparing Components of Citizenship Education and Peace Education (Solem, 2017) ... 94
Table 13: Conceptions of Civic Education – A Comparison (Cohen, 2010) ... 107
Table 14: A Summary of Kennedy’s model (2008) on passive/ active citizenship ... 110
Table 15: Summary of Miller’s framework for curriculum orientations and related learning goals (cited in Evans, 2003) ... 115
Table 16: A Summary of the Theoretical Background for Change Oriented Adult Education (FutureLab report, Manninen et al, 2019) ... 119
Table 17: The summary of the stages of cultural identity: A typology by Banks (2008) ... 127
Table 18: A summary of the characteristics and outcomes of each of three approaches to public pedagogy (Biesta, 2012)... 134
Table 19: Extension of Biesta’s Typology of Public Pedagogy: Three Dimensions for Target Groups (Käpplinger, 2018) ... 149
List of Figures
Figure 1: Phases of search for the first research question... 22
Figure 2: Phases of search for the second research question ... 23
Figure 3: The summary of methodological steps in the “systematic review framework” as the research methodology ... 28
Figure 4: A summary of the analysis results: themes and sub-themes ... 30
Figure 5: A Conceptual Map of Citizenship (Bloemraad, 2000) ... 51
Figure 6: Dimensions and Stratifications of Citizenship (Stokke, 2017) ... 53
Figure 7: Multiple and Relational Scales and Territories of Citizenship (Stokke, 2017)... 58
Figure 8: Four Level Typology of Citizens: Legal, Minimal, Active, and Transformative (Banks., 2014)68 Figure 9: The Interrelationship of the Types of Citizenship (Banks, 2017a) ... 72
Figure 10: Visualization of Banks’s typology of citizenship: failed, recognized, participatory, and transformative ... 75
Figure 11: The Basic Concepts of Human Rights (from Starkey, cited in Osler, 2008) ... 102
Figure 12: Four Conceptions of Civic Education on Two Axes (Cohen 2010) ... 105
Figure 13: Conceptualization of identity; Cultural, Regional, National, and Global Identifications (Banks, 2012) ... 124
Figure 14: The Stages of Cultural Identity: A typology (Banks, 2008) ... 126
Figure 15: Summary of the thesis findings of contributors to the pedagogy for publicness ... 147
1 Introduction: The Importance of Citizenship and Citizen- ship Education and Problem Definition
The purpose of this thesis is to do a systematic review and analyze the content of recent literature on citizenship and citizenship education. A systematic review is a method to review relevant liter- ature in one field through a rigorous and systematic process. This method is used in this thesis project through a qualitative approach.It can provide foundational knowledge which leads to deeper understandings of the meaning of these contested, multidimensional concepts. It would also offer some educational considerations suggested for democratic citizenship in the modern nation- states, with a focus on migration as a significant reality of the contemporary world.
Immigration is a key factor that seriously affects the notion of citizenship (Brubaker, 1992), also the kind of insight to citizenship education as an issue which is not new and has always been among the key objectives of educational systems (Beech, 2020). This worldwide phenomenon is not new either. The flow of people across national borders is as common as the nation-state itself.
However, never throughout the history has “the movement of diverse racial, cultural, ethnic, reli- gious, and linguistic groups within and across nation-states been as large-scale and rapid” (Banks, 2017, p.244). According to the United Nations, in 2017 there were 258 million international mi- grants worldwide (International Migration Report, 2017). The contemporary change has not only included a raise in the rate of migration, but also dramatic alternation in the motifs and attributes of migration so that “more legally differentiated and less well-organized groups and individuals coming from a much greater number of countries of origin”, due to the existence of “digital me- dia”, are able to keep in contact with their “culture of origin” (Vertovec and Wessendorf, cited in Morrice, 2018, p.649). As a result, migratory movements affected by globalization have led to the enhancement of “cultural plurality” and the formation of “hybrid identities” (Delgado-Algarra et al., 2019, p.166), which constitutes a condition of superdiversity. That’s while the most well- known traditional definition of citizenship has been offered by British sociologist T. H. Marshall’s (1950) who considers citizenship as a status: “Citizenship is a status bestowed on those who are full members of a community. All who possess the status are equal with respect to the rights and duties with which the status is endowed” (Marshall, 1950, pp. 28-29).
It is firmly stated in literature that although “assumption of equality” is the most major aspect of Marshall’s notion of citizenship, he was unable to prospect migrations and their aftermaths includ- ing obstacles for equality and Inclusion (Lipset, 1964; Delanty, 2003, Solomos, 2008). In fact, one significant underlying assumption in his typology was the homogeneity of the nation-state which was under question by flows of immigration (Joppke, 2010). A serious problem here would be the Marshallian concept of citizenship, aiming at equality, could create inequality within society, and this evoked many scholars to discuss the notion of citizenship through various aspects of percep- tion. For instance, Delanty (2000) defines citizenship as “membership [in] a political community [that] involves a set of relationships between rights, duties, participation and identity” (Delanty, 2000, p. 9), or Bloemraad (2006) states that citizenship is not only “a legal status” that contains meanings of rights and benefits, but also “an invitation to participate in a system of mutual gov- ernance” that could be an identity, a sense of belonging to a system (Bloemraad, 2006, p. 1). These primary definitions are precise but do not disclose the complicatedness of citizenship which has developed in “modernized nation-states" (Banks, 2014, p.129). Recent views on “democratic gov- ernance beyond the nation-state, such as global civil society”, has prompted further scopes to the citizenship agenda, and has made it a significant area of research (Isin and Turner, cited in Dlanty, 2003).
Respectively and aligned to the transformations on the ways citizenship is approached, the issue of citizenship education has also been viewed in different ways from the past. Almost relevant to the Marshallian notion of citizenship, and "prior to the ethnic revitalization movements of the 1960s and 1970s” the aim of citizenship education in most nation-states was to educate citizens
“who internalized national values, venerated national heroes, and accepted glorified versions of national histories” (Banks, 2017, p. xxvii). In addition, the common approach towards citizenship education for immigrants was the assimilationist one, which as an extreme form of acculturation expected immigrants to take the dominant culture and forget about their culture of origin.
These goals of citizenship education are out-of-date today, since many people have “multiple na- tional commitments” as they live in more than one nation, and practice what Ong calls “flexible citizenship” (Ong, cited in Banks, 2017, p. xxvii).
There has been an extensive debate on citizenship education as a key provision “for ensuring social cohesion and inclusion in modern democratic societies” (Milana, 2008, p.210). In the contempo- rary world, citizenship education is not about doing efforts “to create ‘perfect’ or ‘model’ citizens, instead it needs to be very attentive to “the issues around rights and pluralism” (Kisby, 2017, p.8).
Citizenship education “incorporates civics education and can be seen as being about knowledge, understandings, skills (both cognitive and affective), and dispositions, connected to public life and a better world and it is about participating” (Nagel, 2004, p.64). It should address and promote
“the kind of knowledge, abilities, and sensibilities that people need to live together with others".
Thus, one of the major concerns in pondering citizenship education in present times is to realize the world the citizens of nation-states live in and those others with whom they will interact in the future. Here, again the phenomenon of immigration and our “hyperconnected world” (Beech, 2020, p.128), would be focal points of citizenship education. How would Citizenship education address the issue of “collective action”, connect people to the political system, support them to perceive the complexities of current political world and therefore, advocate democracy? (Kisby, 2017, p.8). In the condition of pluralism and superdiversity which the integrity of the nation-states is essentially questioned at different levels the “nationalistic approach to issues of citizenship and citizenship education” which always distinctly assume “us’ and ‘them’ and requires “loyalty to a geopolitical entity” (Gholami, 2017, p.804), definitely will not afford these needs and aims.
Despite the abundance of research work on the issue of citizenship and its educational considera- tions, there are lots of challenges in different parts of the world. In addition to “the low levels of electoral turn-out" which indicates “the problem of participation” and probably “mistrust of polit- ical institutions” (Dadvand, 2020, p.435), “opposition to immigration”, also “the politics of fear towards the other” is becoming extensively common in different places around the world” (Beech, 2020, p.131). Minoritized groups including immigrants encounter discrimination at school or the wider society due to “their ethnic, racial, cultural, linguistic, and religious differences” (Arthur et.
al., p. xxviii). Lifelong learning which has become a leading director of “policy initiatives” for social cohesion besides “national economic competitiveness” is frequently criticized for being adopted to do the interests of the market state, also for neglecting to react properly to “to integrat- ing cultural difference and diversity into educational environment” (Guo, 2018, pp.677-678).
These can be considered as among the unsolved and antagonistic issues which diversified nations and schools must carry out (Banks, 2017), and are closely connected to the issue of citizenship and citizenship education. As Ross (2014) states “the provision that a society makes for minorities, such as an immigrant minority, critically reflects on the strength and commitment to its conception of citizenship. Moreover, the way in which its educational system teaches about those of migrant or minority descent should demonstrate its understanding of inclusive citizenship education and of its commitment to human rights” (Ross, 2014, p.113). The more these issues are kept unsolved, the more democracy and social justice are in danger. Thus, there is still a need for further research to find new and innovative ways of dealing with these problems.
Realization of “the contemporary transformation of citizenship requires insights from many disci- plines and perspectives”. An abundance of “multidisciplinary and comparative contributions from legal academics, political scientists, sociologists, geographers, historians, and philosophers, to set a new agenda for both theoretical and practical explorations of citizenship” is done (Shachar et al., 2017). Even more relevant to the content of this thesis, literature is indicative of a broad area of research on the notion of citizenship. Many studies have examined the history of citizenship as an old-age concept and the different traditions and regimes which have affected this concept such as liberal, republican, feminist, etc (Burchell, 2002; Harris 2010; Honohan, 2017; Volpp, 2017;
Keynes, 2019), also the meaning and the definition of citizenship in different contexts (Kerber, 1997; Preuss, 2003; Chen et al., 2018; Duplouy, 2018). Some others have focused on citizenship and cultural diversity and denationalization of citizenship (Pakulski, 1997; Stevenson, 2007; Wein- stock, 2017; Gibney, 2017; Lenard, 2018; Hong, 2020), or global and supranational citizenship (Strumia, 2017; Mantu et al., 2020). Also, around the topic of citizenship education there are lots of studies, some of which discuss general approaches and theories about citizenship education (Ichilov, 2013, Hinchliffe, 2020; Wilkins, 2018). Some others include citizenship education in national and localized contexts (Muleya, 2020; Thaiyalan, 2020), or in global and transnational contexts (Davies et al., 2005; Moon, 2010).
Some research work have addressed the gap between citizenship and citizenship education as ide- als, and the real-life experiences of minority groups like immigrants, and the ways that educators can develop citizenship at school so that cause structural inclusion (Banks, 2017), in different
distinct nations such as The United States, Canada, and South Africa (Banks, J. 2017; Joshee &
Thomas, 2017; Moodley, 2017), some European countries (Osler, 2017; Bozec, 2017), China, South Korea, and Singapore (Law, 2017; Cha et al., 2017; Ismail, 2017), The Middle East (Akar, 2017; Al-Nakib, 2017), etc.
These examples can indicate that how the research work found in literature is wide and has specific concerns, rather than include a more general view of the concept of citizenship and citizenship education or offer a set of educational methods which are proper for the era of migration. Even the ones which have immigrants as their focal point have some specificity in the context. No need to say that any kind of research can be undertaken more effectively if researchers can have a funda- mental knowledge of the research concepts and background, that is while literature on citizenship and citizenship education is so broad and complex. In such cases, literature reviews are informative and supportive for further research and can generally provide a context for research.
Reviewing and analyzing the content of the recent literature on citizenship and democratic citizen- ship education connected to migration as a very wide, and complex topic is a necessity to facilitate research. However, despite the many studies in literature, in which some cases were mentioned above, there is a gap for such a systematic review. This theoretical thesis aims at supporting clar- ifications of this contested, multilayered topic, which can stimulate the conduct of more innovative research for researchers – especially the ones for whom this field is new like me, also the promo- tion of programs for citizenship educators, and the direction of attention to the sensitivity of the subject for any potential reader.
In order for doing this, the research seeks for the meaning and definition of the concept of citizen- ship, also the methods and considerations related to “citizenship education” in the literature.
The research report is sectioned in six chapters. The first chapter presents the introduction of the topic of study, the research problem and questions, also the structure of the study. The second chapter introduces the main concepts leading the study. The third chapter presents the methodol- ogy of the research. The fourth and the fifth chapters articulate respectively the findings related to
the first and second question of the study. The final chapter, conclusion, entails the summary of the key findings, discussions, and recommendations.
2 Key Concepts Determining Citizenship and Citizenship Education
The way we designate citizenship is clearly connected to the type of “society and political com- munity” we desire (Mouffe, 1992, 225). It is essential to remember that “Education is a powerful and therefore also a dangerous – tool”; the same thing applies to citizenship education (Manninen et al., 2019, p.9). Adolf Hitler was also considering an educative mission for himself (Pine, 2010), and there was a change in schooling system in Nazi Germany which aimed at specific kind of citizens (Manninen et al., 2019, p.9). It offered one of the most efficient citizenship education pro- grams in the world. Citizenship education can aim at inspiring “myths and superstition”, instead of “rationality and scientific knowledge”, it can be about having citizens who accept subordina- tion, and hierarchical power (Larsson, 2001, pp.28-29). There is a big distinction between “a citi- zenship education that empowers the learner” and the one which is equal to indoctrination. Citi- zenship education is always influenced “by the political context and ideology of the state (Sigauke, 2020, p.245). Thus, it is important to first define the ideals for this desired society. Afterwards, we can explore the kind of citizenship education we pursue.
In order to have an inclusive democratic society, citizenship education needs to aim at specific ideals (Arthur et al., 2008), two of which are addressed in the following section. We can call the kind of citizenship which supports these ideals as democratic citizenship education.
2.1 Democracy as a Key Value for Citizenship
In the previous section and in a review of Dewey’s ideas on citizenship education, a short outlook on a possible approach to democracy was offered. However, according to Crick (2008), democracy is a very contested and broad concept. It is called for by everybody, but it is conceived differently.
As he suggests, it is necessary to consider different possible meanings for it and not one fixed specific definition. Democracy represents “certain institutional arrangements”, or it can indicate
“authorities or individuals behaving in a democratic manner”. Crick explains the four explicit us- ages of democracy throughout history (Crikc, 2008, pp. 13-14).
The first is realized in Plato’s serious blame and then Aristotle's efficient defense. In Greek de- mocracy is meant, “demos (the many, or more often invidiously ‘the mob’) and cracy, meaning rule” (Crick, 2008, p.14). Plato attacks on democracy as “being the rule of the poor and ignorant over the educated and the knowledgeable, ideally philosophers”. His concern originated from the distinction “between knowledge and opinion”; “democracy is rule, or rather the anarchy of mere opinion”. However, Aristotle revised Plato's view rather than denying it completely. “He did not call his “best possible” state democracy, rather politea or polity, a political or civic community of citizens deciding on common action by public debate” (Crick, 2008, p.14). This can be considered as a very significant example of how as Crick states some consider democracy as a must for the prevalence of the “will of the majority”, while some others suppose it as an equivalent of a “good or just government” which may disapprove and confine majority opinion. (Crick, 2008, p.14). In the 5 BC, women, foreigners, slaves and landless people were excluded from the citizen class. The minority citizen class made resolutions by “public debates”. Aristotle regarded the good govern- ment as a combination of “the educated few rulings with the consent of the many” and believed that many more can be entitled to citizenship “by virtue of some education and some property”
(Crick, 2008, p.14).
The second usage is located on “Machiavelli's great republican Discourses, in 17th century English and Dutch republicans, and in the early American republic”: Same as what in Aristotle's theory, good government is a mixed one, which its bases are on “constitutional law – laws", which is not simply make or altered by the majority vote, but by a specific process. “The plebeians, the common people of Rome, elected tribunes to represent them in the aristocratic Senate”, Crick states. The idea was that valid and efficient laws to secure all “were not good enough unless subjects became active citizens making their own laws collectively” (Crick, 2008, p.14).
The third usage of democracy is spotted in “the French Revolution and in the writings of Jean Jacques Rousseau” which includes the idea that “everyone, regardless of education or property, has a right to make his or her will felt in matters of state”. This view deals a lot with the liberation of people from “oppression or ignorance and superstition”, but it is not certainly related to
“individual liberty”. Crick explains that the deficit in the Jacobins’ slogan; “the sovereignty of the people”, which was originated from Rousseau's idea, was that the absence of any “clear repre- sentative institutions”. The general will mostly be connected to “popularity” than to “representa- tive institutions, the rule of law, reasoned debate or individual rights” (Crick, 2008, pp.14-15).
As Crick states the fourth usage can be understood by what includes “the American constitution and in many of the new constitutions in Europe in the 19th century and in the new West German and Japanese constitutions following the Second World War, also in the writings of John Stuart Mill and Alexis de Tocqueville”: all people can be doing as active citizens if they intend to, how- ever, they must mutually regard the identical rights of other citizens according to a “regulatory legal order” in which those rights are specified, supported and confined. So, what is described as democracy today is the mixture of the interpretation of “the power of the people and the idea of legally guaranteed individual rights”. It is required that these two separate ideas be associated, however, they can conflict with each other.
As Crick points out it is necessary to be cautious to call a system as being “democratic” and not to ruin the chance of asking the question of how it could be changed to a more democratic one (Crick, 2008, p.15).Crick refers to the American Robert Dahl, in order to address the features of “the institutions of modern democracy”: “elected representatives with free, fair and frequent elections;
freedom of expression and access to alternative, independent sources of information; autonomous associations, that is citizens must be free to combine together for a wide variety of purposes - including religion, interest groups and political parties; and inclusive citizenship -that no one per- manently resident in a country should be denied rights available to citizens”. In addition, he himself adds two institutions of “the independence of the judiciary and respect for a professional and po- litically neutral bureaucracy”. They are men and women who as citizens should work for and par- ticipate in this (Crick, 2008, p.18). That is why the participation of citizens is an important issue for creating and maintaining democratic societies.
2.2
Social Justice as a Key Value for Citizenship
According to Tyson and Park (2008), the conventional theories of social justice have their origin in Greek philosophy. The concept of social justice is a universal ideal which is employed in relation to everyone regardless of their culture in the world. By referring to different scholars, they explain that the percept of justice has been described through different concepts such as “the common good”, “equality”, “fairness", and “impartiality, choice, and reciprocity" in which social justice is only justifiable within the “hegemony of autonomous individualism”. Here, we are encountering to “the procedural and distributive theory of social justice”. Rawl’s theory of justice could be an example of these theories, which “has an intrinsic inadequacy in addressing socially, culturally and institutionally unjust relationships”. Thus, it is not enough to define the concept of justice limited to “the distributive concept of material justice”, since this would inhibit the “people in social and cultural margins” from resisting to the “structural violence” (Tyson & park, 2008, p.30).
Young, for instance, establishes a theory of justice which emphasizes the omission of oppression which is “the vast and deep injustices some groups suffer as a consequence of often unconscious assumptions and reactions … in the normal processes of everyday life” (Young, 1990, p.5). Tyson and Park by referring to different scholars address the concepts in the literature which describe
“the unjust reality of the world” such as “hegemony, structural violence, culture of power, etc.”.
Cultural inconsistencies among various “racial, ethnic, gender, and language groups” expose “un- equal diversity and diverse inequalities” (Tyson & Park, 2008, p.31). Ethnocentrism, which is called by Young (1990) “cultural imperialism”, and “involves the universalization of a dominant group's experience and culture, and its establishments as the norm” (Young, 1990, p.59), is con- sidered by some scholars as the biggest obstacle to social justice (Tyson & Park, 2008, p.31).
The table below represents differences between the first and second groups of theories which were explained above and are called retrospectively “logocentric” and “grounded” theories.
Table 1: Two Approaches to Social Justice (Tyson & Park, 2008) Logocentric Theories Grounded theories
Approach Deductive Inductive
Starting point Ideal concept of justice Concrete examples of injustice Main concept Fairness and impartiality Oppression and domination
Emphasis Redistribution/Procedure Resistance/Recognition Context Universal and culturally neutral
Historically and culturally spe- cific
Perspective Everyone’s perspective Perspectives of oppressed
Representative theories Rawls (1971) Young (1990)
Barry (1989) Collins (1991,1998)
Kohlberg (1981) Adams (1997, 2000) Theoretical background Political liberalism Postmodern critical theories
Therefore, one of the major objectives of the “social justice education” is the perception, ac- ceptance and embodiment of “cultural pluralism” (Lewis, 2001, p.189). Social justice education is acknowledged when according to Wade (2001, p.25),
“[A]ll people have their basic needs met, are physically and psychologically safe, are able to de- velop their full capacities, and are capable of interacting with others in the democratic sphere … In a socially just society, every person is treated according to their need toward the goal of becoming capable and contributing members of society. “
The significance of diversity and equity in democratic societies is also embedded in the issue of social justice.
3 Methodology
3.1 The Aims of the Study and Research Questions
As it was justified in the introduction section this qualitative systematic literature review aims at providing a fundamental knowledge of the research concepts (citizenship and citizenship educa- tion) through the clarification of the meaning of citizenship and its educational method. This foun- dation can pave the way for stimulation of the conduct of more effective research or policies which would support democracy and social justice.
The following research questions would guide the review and its analysis in the procedure of the study:
1. How is the concept of “citizenship” defined and what does it mean?
2. What are the methods and considerations related to “citizenship education” (with a focus on immigrants)?
These questions are significant questions. Due to the importance of citizenship education as a key provision for assurance of social cohesion and inclusion in democratic societies, also the complex- ity of the current world as a result of migration and globalization, it is critical to provide efficient citizenship education plans. This will not happen without having a right and exact perception of the notion of citizenship which as a contested and multilayered concept, is not easy to be defined.
Providing the citizenship education programs based on a simplistic perception and relying on the old methods of citizenship education, regardless of the current changes and challenges can be a great loss.
3.2 Systematic Review as the Research Method
A systematic literature review is a method to review relevant literature in one field which demands
“a highly rigorous and systematic process” which not only encompasses “the content found in the literature, but the methods used to find the literature, what search strategies you used and how and where you searched”. It also includes criteria for the inclusion and exclusion of literature which is
found through the search. Systematic reviews have been used in medical science to promote the quality of the review process and as “a key tool for developing the evidence base” over the last decade. Their employment has also been expanded to the other disciplines (Tranfield et al., 2003, p.209).
In this thesis a systematic literature review is used as an alternative for a narrative literature review.
What makes a systematic approach different from a narrative approach is in the documentation of the search and as the result a less biased. In conducting a systematic review as a data collection method (a method for finding the relevant literature) these things should be explained
• What research strategy is used?
• What tools are employed (if any)? Where the search is done, which databases or search engines are used?
• How has the research been designed? – what key terms are used? What refinements?
• On what criteria the resources are selected? How is the literature returned for use been evaluated in the study? The criteria for inclusion, exclusion and the key themes that were read for. (Griffth University, 2020)
In addition to this and alike to any kind of reviews, systematic reviews include synthesis or analysis of the data. This could be realized also from the definition by Fink (2014, p.3) who de- scribes a systematic literature review as a "systematic, explicit and reproducible method for iden- tifying, evaluating and synthesizing the existing body of completed and recorded work produced by researchers, scholars and practitioners". In the following sections, first I describe the process of the data collection for the review and then the process of data analysis:
3.2.1 Data and Data Collection
The data in this literature review includes the content of articles and books where citizenship and related educational methods and considerations are described, defined and theorized. The articles could include both types of theoretical and empirical studies. In the second case the theoretical backgrounds of the studies were used as the data.
The table 2 shows the search description of the search done for the review. As a whole the details for six searches are reported in this table. For the ones which are done through google scholar search engine, the availability of the articles was searched, also through UEF library international databases in addition to the google scholar.
Table 2: Summary of search description
Search Descrip-
tions Resource Search String Years Cov-
ered
Other Refinements
Search 1 Google Scholar “meaning of citizenship” 2017-2020
Peer reviewed
&
Full Text available articles
Search 2 Google Scholar “meaning of citizenship” 2017-2020
Peer reviewed
&
Full Text available articles
Search 3 Google Scholar
“citizenship education for immigrants”
OR “citizenship education for migrants”
OR “citizenship education for refugees”
OR “citizenship education for newcomers”
2014-2020
*
Peer reviewed
&
Full Text available articles
Search 4 Google scholar
“citizenship education for” AND (immigrants OR migrants OR refugees
OR newcomers)
2017-2020
Peer reviewed
&
Full Text available articles Search 5 UEF Library
Catalogue “handbook” AND “citizenship” Any Year --- Search 6 UEF Library
Catalogue “citizenship education” AND “migration” Any Year ---
*The time period was extended, since the number of search results for 2017-2020 was limited.
Reporting the Phases of Search for Collecting Data
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) website has in- troduced for the “Transparent Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis”, a four-phase flow diagram which shows “numbers of identified records, excluded articles, and included studies”
(Liberati et al., 2009). I adapted this diagram in this thesis in order to address the above questions
and to document the process of data collection method in this systematic review. The two diagrams (Figures 1 & 2) relate to the searches for the first and the second research questions.
After formulating research questions and before doing these searches, based on the main objective of the study, I did different searches by combining the key words like migration, immigrants, cit- izenship, review, etc, with AND/OR Boolean operators. By doing this, I aimed at knowing about the existence of a literature review similar to my thesis topic and making myself a bit more familiar with literature on citizenship and citizenship education. In addition, I tried to identify which terms add the value of the search by looking at the search results. This experience guided me how to decide about the search strings of the research. I did not document this search since it was not done systematically, however, I named this search as “pilot search” in the diagram in the other resource column.
Systematic reviews often focus on empirical questions for which there is a need to define tough and strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. However, this study is a theoretical review which aims at examining the body of the theory related to the concepts of citizenship and citizenship education.
Also, the search done for this aims at addressing two research questions which are not formulated very specifically. Thus, the inclusion reading criteria in this study are not narrow and they are just about the relevancy of the content to the research questions.
Studies were included for full-text reading if they appeared to meet the inclusion criteria at the first stage through the reading of the titles, abstracts, and the subtitles. Reading the subtitles was necessary as any of these, including the theoretical background could provide an answer to the research questions. That is why there were just a few articles which were excluded only based on their abstracts.
As the diagrams indicates almost 128 articles were produced to fit the criteria for full-text reading, out of which the content of 91 (75+16) ones were included in the final analysis which constitutes the findings section.
Figure 1: Phases of search for the first research question
Figure 2: Phases of search for the second research question
3.2.2 Data Analysis
Data analysis in qualitative research is “a dynamic and creative process”, through which re- searchers try to get a profound perception of what they study and to continually refine their inter- pretations (Taylor et al, 2015, p.168). A major continuous process for such kind of analysis would be the process of “discovery” which is about “identifying themes and developing concepts and propositions” and happens from the first steps of working with data. In other words, “data collec- tion and analysis go hand in hand” in qualitative research. Coding data is another activity included in the process of qualitative data analysis. It is an interpretive act which “refines one’s understand- ing of the subject matter” (Taylor et al., 2015, pp.168-170).
“Interim analysis” is the term that is suggested for describing this process which indicates “the cyclical process of collecting and analyzing data during a single research study” (Johnson and Christensen, 2012, 587). I did not do the process of data collection and analysis distinctively and continued this interim process until I realized that I have understood the topic properly and the data can address the research questions efficiently and effectively according to the essences of a research as a thesis and considering the time I had for that.
While doing this study, I had an eye on the characteristics of qualitative data analysis, also the aims of conceptual analysis. I recognize the first stage of what I did in this analysis process, as the steps Taylor and his colleagues (2015, p.181) mention for the coding process.
In order to discover the topic, first I made myself familiar with the data, by reading and rereading them carefully. I read all the articles which had the criteria for full-text reading, and it took a considerable time for me to feel ready to engage in the analysis exclusively. After becoming sure of understanding the data through times of readings, I created a list of ideas and emphasis in the data for each article separately. Here these ideas can be considered similar to phrases which rep- resents “codes” in qualitative analysis. Then I made categories by combining codes and also themes by combining categories. Although, I did not employ any “priori codes” in this analysis, since any kind of codes were not developed “before examining the current data” (Johnson &
Christensen, 2012, p. 588), as the research is a literature review and the ideas in data have a theory form, the data itself could support these coding steps by suggesting categories or themes. However, since the topic is broad, the data was so large, and the author of each article aimed at different aspects which exist relevant to the topic, deciding about the final themes and creating sub-catego- ries or sub-themes was demanding. I consider this procedure as what is named creating “Hierar- chical Category Systems”, which means that sometimes codes or categories “can be organized into different levels or hierarchies”. (Johnson & Christensen, 2012, 590). This process included also finding out about some other kinds of relationships, of course.
I did not have a fixed data when I was doing the coding steps, since I was actually simultaneously deciding on what part of the collected data would include the main data for the final analysis. That is why I did the process of coding for the all data that was collected in my systematic search, as the full-text reading data. Through this, the patterns and themes emerged gradually. While the further steps were done, some categories and themes were refined and redefined or collapsed. Even some of the initial data was removed after coding as they did not include the main and significant content used as findings which could address the research questions. I can call this data as “irrele- vant collected data”, since as it is said the authentic data cannot be omitted while doing the analysis process. In fact, it was after doing the coding for all the data extracted from the full text read articles, which I discovered the main categories with which I could address the research questions effectively and found out that the data in which articles could be included in the conceptual anal- ysis. In this coding process I benefited the suggestion by Taylor and his colleague as “developing a story line”. As they suggest:
“Once you have done some preliminary open coding, you should try to develop a story line that can guide further analysis. Of course, any story line must always be open to revision. A story line will help you decide what concepts and themes you want to communicate in your study and how your data should be organized and coded. It is useful to think about coding in terms of writing a book (which many people will be trying to do literally). Decide on the major focus of the book, or what we have called the story line. Then, on the basis of the themes you have identified and your analytic memos, decide on what chapters should be in the book, keeping in mind that each chapter must relate to the story line. This will give you the basic structure for your coding scheme. …..
After you have listed themes, see how they relate to your story line and where they fit into your
hypothetical chapter outline. You will probably find that some themes overlap or relate conceptu- ally and that you will be able to collapse them under broader headings. Some themes will not relate to your story line; these can be set aside”. (Taylor, et al., 2015, pp.181-182)
I also did “memoing” which holds “recording reflective notes about what is learnt from data”
(Johnson & Christensen, 2012, p.587) and supported the task of “conceptual analysis” as the main activity for reporting the study analysis and can be considered as the second stage of the analysis besides.
Conceptual analysis is one of the three clusters that constitute “the complex set of activities of the scientific method” besides experimentation and mathematization. However, it seems to be less
“well-known and valued” despite the two other ones (Machado & Silva, 2007, p.671). This aspect of science was addressed before the scientific revolution, in “medieval and classic Greek science”
analysis. In fact, science has always been included the screening of concepts and arguments for clarity and coherence (Machado & Silva, 2007, p.680).
Conceptual analysis encompasses “the actions researchers engage in when they evaluate the lan- guage of their science. These actions include but are not limited to assessing the clarity or obscurity of scientific concepts, evaluating the precision or vagueness of scientific hypotheses, assessing the consistency or inconsistency of a set of statements and laws, and scrutinizing arguments and chains of inferences for unstated but crucial assumptions or steps”. The goal, therefore, as Machado and Silva refer to Laudan, is to advance “the conceptual clarity of a theory through careful clarifica- tions and specifications of meaning” (Lauden, cited in Machado & Silva, 2007, p.671). Their in- vestigation on Galileo’s work illustrates that conceptual analysis can identify “a problem or diffi- culty associated with a concept, hypothesis, or account” which its roots fall in one of these cate- gories: “inappropriate or illogical classification, excessively vague and ad hoc explanations, irref- utable hypotheses, unjustified extension of a familiar concept to an unfamiliar domain, or semantic ambiguity (Similar words may hide different conceptions”. The ways through which conceptual analysis do so, includes:
• “Clarifying the Grammar and Meaning of Concepts
• Revealing Unacknowledged Assumptions and Steps in Arguments
Questioning the Consistency of an Account” (Machado & Silva,2007, pp.673-676)
These activities are done in data analysis of this thesis. It can be seen in the findings of the study, that how I tried to address the arguments in literature and explain the identification of the “purpose and structure of the argument”, the probable “critiques on the structure of the argument”, and the assessment of “the effects of the critique on the purposes of the argument”; the actions which according to Machado and Silva, are the steps involved in conceptual analysis. As they state this method is sound reasoning, but the one that is “applied to the verbal output of scientists, to their theories, accounts, models, and concepts”. “Probing these verbal outputs for their intelligibility”
can be compared as “probing experiments for their methodological soundness or quantitative mod- els for their mathematical correctness” (Machado & Silva,2007, pp.677- 679).
It should be said that these two stages (general qualitative research analysis and conceptual analy- sis), are integrated to each other and cannot be considered as two distinct processes in practice. I adapted and combined guidelines prescribed by Braun & Clarke (2006), also Taylor and his col- leagues (2015) for addressing the steps for the data analysis: 1. Discovery, 2. Open coding, 3.
Focused coding, 4. Conceptual analysis, 5. Producing the report. I would emphasis again on the cyclicality of the process and integrity of the stages.
Figure 3 illustrates a summary of the steps in the whole methodological process.
Figure 3: The summary of methodological steps in the “systematic review framework” as the re- search methodology
Through the whole process the 28 categories of data, transformed to 7 main themes which consti- tute the main findings the research. The figure below (Figure 4) illustrates a bigger picture of the themes and sub themes created through the analysis.
Figure 4: A summary of the analysis results: themes and sub-themes
In addition, the final themes and sub-themes and the included articles relevant to each of these are indicated in table 3.
Table 3: Final themes and the relevant included articles Final Themes Data Included in Final Analysis
Meaning of Citizenship
Marshall (1950), Turner (1997), Bloemraad (2000), Turner (2001), Heater (2004), Nagel (2004), Abowitz & Harnish (2006), Lawy & Biesta, (2006), Engin & Bryan (2007), Isin & Turner (2007), Ben-Porat &
Ghanem (2017), Bloemraad (2017), Leydet (2017), Wildemeersch, 2017, Stokke (2017), Mezzaroba & da Silveira (2018), Canzutti (2019).
Typologies of Citizen- ship and Citizens’ Par-
ticipation
Westheimer and Kahne (2003), Wood et.al (2013), Banks (2014), Banks (2017a) Thaiyalan (2020), Heggart and Flowers (2020)
Foundational Thinkers of Citizenship and Citi-
zenship Education
Dewey (2005), Višnovsky & Zolcer (2016), Tan (2020), Miller (2020), Gomez (2020), Beech (2020), Mihăilă and Lăzăroiu (2020), Neufeld (2020), Kester and Aryoubi (2020)
Different forms of Citi- zenship Education
Galtung (1976), Korten (1990), Lickona (1991), Pippin (1991), McCully et al., (1999),Tomlinson (1999) ), Fisk (2000), Gur Ze’ev (2001), Davies et al (2005), Scheuerman (2006), Appiah (2006), Arthur et al. (2008), Berkowitz et.al (2008), Mitchell (2008), Bickmore (2008), Pike (2008), Duty and Merryfield (2008), Pike (2008), Kennedy (2008), Annette (2008) Milana (2008), Banks (2009), Fejes (2009), Deeley (2010), Cohen (2010), Nicoll et al. (2013), Aggleton (2016), Kisby (2017), Kisby (2017Solem (2017), Noh (2020), Yang et al. (2020), Bevington et al.
(2020) , Franch, (2020) Education for Trans-
formative Citizenship
Picon (1991), Martin (2003), Westheimer and Kahne (2003), Evans (2008), Krupar and Prins (2016), Banks (2017a) Manninen (2017), Man- ninen et al. (2019)
Multicultural Citizen- ship Education
Delanty (2003), Banks et al. (2005), Banks (2008), Banks (2012), Banks (2017a), Gholami (2017), Wildemeersch (2017), Zembylas (2020)
Public Pedagogy
Arendt (1958), Arendt (1977), Marquand (2004), Rancière (2004), Todd (2008), Biesta (2012), Käpplinger (2018), Coo (2020), O'Malley et al.
(2020), Dictionary of Education (2021)
3.3 Research Quality
The terms validity and reliability are employable in a broad context to address “the integrity and application of the methods undertaken and the precision in which the findings accurately reflect the data” (validity), and to explain “consistency within the employed analytical procedures” (reli- ability). There are various tests and measures which can be undertaken to evaluate the validity and reliability of quantitative research. However, they cannot be used in relation to qualitative research, since qualitative and quantitative research are inherently distinctive from each other. Still, there are some “methodological strategies” by which qualitative researchers can increase the credibility of their findings. In addition, different scholars have discussed whether the terms such as validity, reliability and generalizability are appropriate to evaluate qualitative research, regarding the innate difference between these two types of the research methods (Noble & Smith, 2015, 34-35).
In this section of the thesis, first I mention the methodological strategies I have used to enhance the credibility of the results. Then by referring to a model by Tracy (2010), I will discuss about the quality of this qualitative research as a self-evaluation.
3.3.1 Methodological Strategy for Enhancing Credibility
A systematic literature review is a method to find relevant literature in a specific field through a
“highly rigorous and systematic process”. This process includes not only the content in the liter- ature, but also the methods that are employed to find it, and all the details related to the search of literature. This makes the method to associate with less bias comparing to other forms of reviews such as narrative reviews. So, the purpose of using this method is to create more clarity, validity and auditability in the review (Tranfield et al., 2003).
Like in any other study, it is important to form clearly stated question (s) for the research. As in my study the synthesis and analysis of findings would lead to the emergent of different themes about these two issues, the research questions for this review were set clearly.
To find the most relevant literature available, I defined proper search strings with which my search can reach to results relevant to research questions. Then, to avoid biases related to the source, I used the Google Scholar search engine and did not limit my search to any specific author. The only refinement which is used was about the time period and then screening some pages of the search results as the pages were too many. This was done to limit the amount of data in a way that would be logic to manage it.
The time period refinement was so that I could benefit from the newest sources in the field. On the other hand, I could also benefit from the older data as I have used the reference of the selected sources as my data (other sources). Non-peer reviewed materials were also removed. I kept record of the process of searching and reported this process in diagrams in a way that the search process is documented in different steps. I defined the inclusion / exclusion criteria mainly according to the research questions. The criteria were about the relevancy of the data to the research questions, and it is subjective to some extent. However, this can be considered as the characteristic of a qual- itative data, specially a theorical literature review.
In order to reduce human error and bias in the data collection and analysis process in systematic literature reviews, data-extraction forms, which include details of the information source can be employed, also the data extraction process could be done by more than one researcher. However, since my study is not engaged with empirical data, these methods could not be useful or practical in my thesis. However, I tried to review the data with a concern for employing a wide range of voices, and with logic and reasoning for including or excluding the data.
I conclude that although using the systematic literature review as a method has lots of benefits, however, it cannot be a solution for all types of problems with reliability and validity, especially in a theoretical review.
3.3.2 Self-Evaluation of the Research Based on a Qualitative Quality Model
Tracy (2010) provides a model for quality in qualitative model which includes eight points (p.837).
I would go through these points one by one and explain how these are established in this thesis.
Thus, the quotations are all borrowed from Tracy’s article.
1. Worthy topic:
According to how Tracy (2010) describes a worthy topic, I assess the topic of this thesis worthy, since it is relevant to how democracy and social justice as two ideals, can be preserved and ad- vanced in the era of migration as a significant and challenging phenomenon. The themes related to the topic of citizenship and citizenship education can lead to a “raised level of awareness” and so can provide what is called “educative authenticity” by Tracy. Since, the topic of this thesis is very attached to human rights and ethics, also the analysis method aims at critical thinking, it provides “strong moral overtones” and raise “critical intelligence”. In addition, the research topic is worthy as it questions “taken-for granted assumptions, and challenges well-accepted ideas” such as the ones exists in assimilationist approach or nationalistic views. (Tracy, 2010, pp.840-841)
2. Rich rigor:
Tracy refers to Weick and the concept of “requisite variety” in order to describe rich rigor. “Req- uisite variety, a concept borrowed from cybernetics, refers to the need for a tool or instrument to be at least as complex, flexible, and multifaceted as the phenomena being studied”. Systematic literature review can be considered as the tool which works for this, in this study. It could provide
“abundant data”, also a chance for seeing the complexity of the topic. I believe that “enough time”
was spent to gather the significant data and the data has been perfectly enough to cover the aims of the thesis.
There is one issue that the articles included in this study as data are related to the year 2020. That is while the thesis would be published in Spring 2021. Thus, there is a gap for the data produced in recent months, and I could not run the search again for including them due to the time limita- tions.
“The number of pages of fieldnotes”, I used for “sorting, choosing and organizing data” is very large. Rigorous data analysis which “may be achieved through providing the reader with an expla- nation about the process by which the raw data are transformed and organized into the research report”, is also used in this study, however, there might be less to be presented in the research report than what is done by the researcher”. That is why I asses that the “fieldnotes style” I used could have been more transparent in a way that the reader could also know more about the proce- dure of data analysis. The reason for this, is that I did not in mind from the beginning of doing the data analysis that the more transparency about the analysis process makes the research the more credible. That is actually what I learned from my research experience. However, I am sure that I did a lot for the analysis, and the problem I mentioned is just about the method of documentation in a way that could be presented in the thesis. Albeit, presenting the process very clearly is not easy in such a study that all the data have a theoretical essence any way. (Tracy, 2010, p.841)
3. Credibility:
Credibility can be reached in qualitative research through the practices which include “thick de- scription”, “triangulation”, and “crystallization”. Based on the way Tracy defines these features, I can say that my research does not involve these practices that much due to the research type which is a literature review. There have not been any participants in my research or there has not been the possibility of using multiple types of data and researcher points of view like what happens in ethnographical research. However, I tried to advance the credibility of the literature review by using a systematic method and being not biased as much as I can in choosing the data and in data analysis process. (Tracy, 2010, p. 842-843)
4. Resonance:
Tracy uses resonance in her model to refer to “the research’s ability to meaningfully reverberate and affect an audience”. I have not done practices such as “aesthetic merit” and “generalizabil- ity/transferability” which is mentioned as two key paths to resonance in this thesis, however, I hope the relevance of topic to the concepts of belonging, identity, and the notions like failed citi- zenship or stratified citizenship, also the discussions around them have the potential to motivate affective stories in the readers who have experienced them as immigrants, or adult educators.
The research has had a significance for me to feel more commitment in myself to find the ways to practice transformative citizenship and try to advance democracy and social justice by being so. I have become more sensitive to focus on the experiences of immigrants as citizens and to distin- guish around myself the practices which have an origin on the assimilationist approach more than before. I hope that these would also happen to the potential readers in different ways. (Tracy, 2010, pp.844-845)
5. Significant contribution:
The main reason for that of I chose this topic had been to make a solid knowledge base for myself to do more research on the topic in future. I hope this study provides this also for other young researchers like me. By this research analyzed, I have combined and made visible different per- spectives on citizenship and citizenship education. I believe that the findings would significantly add to our understanding of the topic.
By accentuating the importance of topic, this thesis would be able to motivate the researchers or educators to “generate new research”, “improve practice”, and influence “policy makers” or “pro- gram planners”.
The research on democratic citizenship education emphasizes on equality, social justice and hu- man rights. It would have concerns for the citizens’ agency and would contribute to social change.
So, it can “liberate and empower”. It can also contribute to facilitation of integration of immigrants and preservation of plurality as a condition of democracy. I hope this study would not be an ex- ception for these contributions. (Tracy, 2010, pp.845-846)
