Classrooms for Democracy

Experiments with Deliberation and Russian University Students

Denis Makarov

• Verlag: Kettering Foundation
• Jahr: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781945577208
• Thema: Politica e relazioni internazionali
• Thema: Educazione civica e cittadinanza

Classrooms for Democracy, by Denis V. Makarov, documents a project, carried out by the Foundation for Development of Civic Culture, in collaboration with the Department of Political Science and Sociology, Moscow State Pedagogical University, that undertook comprehensive research on how deliberative, politically oriented communication in college courses, along with other helpful educational methods and tools, could improve the way in which institutions of higher education in Russia carry out responsible civic and democratic missions. This book details the project's five stages, carried out over five academic years. The first two stages examined Russian universities' and colleges' exposure to the civic and political agendas of their society. The researchers looked for the potential that higher education could offer for the country's democratic development. Stages three and four experimented with different educational practices related to deliberative pedagogy. Five public issues were framed and conducted within the National Issues Forums format. The purpose of these experiments was to understand the impact that a wider presence of deliberative pedagogy might have on Russian education. The goal of the fifth stage was to synthesize and critically analyze outcomes collected during the previous stages of research and to address the current state of the civic attitudes of college students, challenges of introducing public politics, and prospects for the current generation of college students. The book includes a foreword by Juan Pablo Beca.

1	IS THERE A CIVIC MISSION IN RUSSIAN HIGHER EDUCATION?
	Stage One (2006-2007)

1	IS THERE A CIVIC MISSION IN RUSSIAN HIGHER EDUCATION?

The First Stage at a Glance

The first stage of our research examined to what extent Russian higher education was carrying out a civic mission in contemporary society.

We developed a set of 10 research questions to evaluate the presence of civic education and its effectiveness in Russia’s higher education institutions. Some of these questions were basic, asking what a university’s civic mission was, whether or not higher education played a role in democratization, and whether or not university courses or faculty responsibilities contained civic components. Other questions tried to get at the heart of the development of democratic habits: the role of universities and how they could contribute to the development of a democratic citizenry. One of the final questions asked whether or not the campus climate encouraged or discouraged civic engagement.

In order to provide the most comprehensive answers to those questions, throughout the 2006-2007 academic years, we used focus groups, interviewed students, faculty, and administrators, and evaluated textbooks and relevant publications.

Review of Existing Publications

In analyzing textbooks on civic education in modern Russia, we see three main trends:

•direct use of analogous Western textbooks or translation of the same ideas (for example, when we speak about textbooks and courses developed with the assistance of the Civic Education Project)¹;

•displacement of civic education with so-called Patriotic Education;

•elaboration of new forums and methods for mobilizing pro-governmental political participation, taking into account Russian political culture.

Patriotic education in Russia generally encourages love of the nation within the current political context. Currently, you are less likely to be considered a patriot if you challenge official governmental policies or criticize Russian realities, traditional habits, mindsets, or stereotypes. Citizens are expected to be loyal to the government and the president. Within this context, a citizen’s civic activism should take place only within the framework of what the government considers good for the country.

The obstacles to the development of civic-education courses in Russia include the fact that the Russian academy tends to focus on general theories, with few practical components. This approach overlooks elements that could be useful in developing an active citizenry. These elements are still missing in civic-education courses. Other barriers are the fact that some courses that describe current political practices are only taught to students who specialize in political science,² and that public-relations courses focus on shaping public opinion while ignoring other organizational aspects of public communication.³

In any event, many authors and academicians believe there is a general skepticism concerning the possibilities for progressive civil-society development in modern Russia. Textbooks are also few in number, simply because Russia has few academic experts on civil-society practices.

The first Russian textbooks on civic education appeared in the second half of the 1990s, but most of them were for secondary education. Only a few could have been useful for higher education.⁴ Those textbooks attempted to describe the civil-society institutions of a modern democratic state, but they did not teach students/citizens how to develop and use such institutions. Most of those publications’ examples were connected to international experiences not familiar enough to Russian citizens. The textbooks were also lacking in practical advice on how a particular person could realize his or her interests in modern politics.

However, by 2000, political and educational leaders started to rethink the role higher education should have in influencing young citizens. By that time, courses began to appear in which a citizen could be understood as a basic actor in politics. Common names for such courses were “Sociology of Politics” (political sociology⁵) and “Social Politics.”⁶ Both courses, inter alia, teach about individual rights, how to solve social problems, and how self-governance can help solve crucial issues.

But in other ways, the two courses are quite different. The Sociology of Politics is somewhat connected with political socialization. Its textbooks include special articles on potential roles that citizens can play in politics. They also explore political interests, but with the caveat that political interests should be appropriately framed so they “could be heard by authorities.”⁷ The course also shows how modern political institutions work and how citizens can use such institutions in order to protect their interests. On the other hand, Social Politics teaches crisis management theory and practices —for example, teaching students what can be done if problems like job loss and discrimination occur.

At the same time, the courses share certain characteristics that can relate to civic education components, such as:

•Practical orientation. Both courses aim for successful socialization for students (teaching how to protect personal rights, how to solve social problems, how a particular citizen can realize and develop himself in a modern society, etc.);

•Human-values orientation. Both courses try to teach students how to live in an environment where certain rules exist and where your freedom is limited by freedom of others;

•Community orientation. The courses make some efforts to explain and demonstrate to students how self-governance within society (especially at a local level) can contribute to solving crucial problems.

Some textbooks recently published in Russia try to build a theory of citizen participation. Some of these textbooks have appeared as a result of cooperative projects between Russian and American academic and pedagogical institutions. They attempt to frame possible mechanisms that determine participatory practices within Russian political history. Many such textbooks collect local “participatory experiences” at different locations of the Russian Federation.⁸

In addition to textbooks, special university departments, whose main purpose is to teach people how they can participate in politics, have appeared recently. One such example is the Moscow-based Higher School of Economics’ Department of Public Politics. The department’s mission says, in part, that the future development of Russia depends upon the political participation of the public. Such participation is widely understood as one that offers the possibility of communication between different political and social groups. This communication tolerates existence of the public’s different opinions and judgments; however, the final decision about resolution of a public problem is currently at the discretion of authorities.

The Department of Public Politics⁹ opened in 2000 and now has bachelor’s and master’s degree programs. The basic courses of its master’s program include E-governance, direct democracy and citizens’ participation in public policy, and public control.

The department has numerous publications dedicated to the subject matter.¹⁰ The head of the department, Professor Nina Belyaeva, is also an author of several publications related to civic issues. In her book Citizen Expertise as a Form of Civic Participation,¹¹ she pays particular attention to the role that civic associations play in society as well as their creation and function. Professor Belyaeva also discusses the phenomenon of so-called “civic expertise”—the engagement needed when there is no clear response to a problem. In her view, public discussion, with the help of roundtable dialogue that includes public experts, representatives of social group(s) involved in conflict, and civil-society organizations, is a central method/process that helps to identify solutions.

Another example of the growth in civic studies is the development of civic-like education within the context of social-work studies. Practical social work in Russia is generally understood as assistance to less protected categories of people, like those who are elderly, handicapped, or homeless; poor families; children, and so forth. However, the concept of social work has widened and now includes spheres dealing with unemployment and job search, drug and alcohol addiction rehabilitation, legal consultations on a variety of life issues, and even aspects of building healthier communities. Within social work, authors tend to consider civic education as a means for developing civic responsibility, showing citizens not only ways to defend themselves (in difficult and conflicted situations), but also possibilities for helping others. Thus, civic participation is regarded as a basis for ideas of cooperation, communication, and social projects. Issues of civic participation and involvement are part of the research done at the Department of Social Anthropology and Social Work at Saratov State Technical University.

Saratov University has elaborate textbooks and courses that help to teach students the importance of civic participation for solving crucial social problems.¹² Most of these textbooks are devoted to the explanation of particular social issues. While they include the background of a problem, possible models for participation—framed as a question of “how citizens’ participation could help to solve such a problem”¹³—are presented as well.

Although there are some good signs that Russian academic culture has started to pay more attention to conducting research and developing studies in civic education, the efforts needed in this field go far beyond educational needs. A conservative mindset prevents domestic academics from easily adapting experiences and practices developed by Western educators. Nevertheless, Russian higher education schools’ civic-like education takes its timid steps, mostly because of foreign initiatives or the Russian specialists who have chances to work or study abroad.

Universities’ Civic Mission and Democratization Process

The first steps in our research brought us a list of statements proposing characteristics of what might be considered a civic mission. This list included 16 statements that have been further integrated into the questionnaires, prepared for our mass interviews research segment. Characteristics of a civic mission include those which:

1.help develop necessary participatory skills for governing the country;

2.teach respect for the law;

3.provide knowledge/information about democracy;

4.teach patriotism;

5.develop critical thinking skills;

6.teach respect for human rights and freedoms;

7.stimulate an interest in politics;

8.teach collectivism¹⁴ and provide collective activity skills;

9.teach respect for the federal government;

10.teach collective decision-making skills;

11.help develop a personal sense of being independent and free;

12.teach tolerance;

13.help others form a sense of responsibility for the country’s destiny;

14.help to overcome post-totalitarian remnants of the past;

15.train in the principles of democratic participation in politics;

16.help form moral and value platforms.

By the end of Stage One we had collected 81 questionnaires¹⁵ (from students, faculty, and university administrators), along with judgments received with the help of other research tools, including oral interviews/consultations, focus groups, and research meetings.

All the statements were ranked. The more points that were given, the more valuable the statement was for our respondents. When the results were tallied, all 16 statements were more or less individually distributed, with less than a 3 percent difference between the statement with the most points and the one with the fewest number of points. All the statements appeared to be important in our interviewees’ perceptions.

Analyzing answers to other questions from our interviews brought us to an understanding that Russian universities’ civic-education efforts are below public expectations. Russian higher education operates at somewhere around 60 percent of the full power needed for Russian emerging democracy.

We have also examined evaluations given by our interviewees regarding the role/status that college education system components play in the country’s transformation from its totalitarian past. Just over one-third of the interviewees believe that the Russian higher education system plays a significant role in the social/political democratization process in Russia. During their interviews, faculty members and university administrators offered more positive perceptions of the roles universities are playing in democratization.

One professor explained that, from her point of view, during the societal and political transformation from socialism to democracy in Russia, not many social institutions were able to keep and maintain their socializing and educational missions. At the same time, Russian higher education was among the few stable “social agents” during post-communist chaos.

Colleges and universities were resistant to various destructive processes happening throughout the last two decades. Although Russian schools are conservative in certain respects, they do try to implement step-by-step democratic components for both educational and administrative purposes. Some argued that higher education is certainly not in the vanguard of the democratization process, yet the schools’ curricula have become more neu...