LEARNING FOR ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP

Foreword by Edith Cresson

Learning for active citizenship:
a significant challenge in building a Europe of knowledge

At the dawning of the « knowledge age », we are moving into a new phase of European development. The Agenda 2000 proposals see the Union rising to the challenge: innovation, research, education and training are to become core axes of internal policy. And here I want at once to underline that the primary aim of education is the development of human potential, of the whole person, enabling all citizens to participate as fully as possible in cultural, economic, political and social life. It should go without saying that learning for active citizenship lies at the heart of our civilisation’s aspirations in this regard.

The Amsterdam Treaty commits us to developing citizenship of the Union, not just in a legal sense but also through the fulfilment of the ideal of a Europe close to its citizens. This means seeking to encourage people’s practical involvement in the democratic process at all levels, and most particularly at European level. I maintain, then, that turning a Europe of Knowledge into reality importantly includes promoting a broader idea of citizenship, which can strengthen the meaning and the experience of belonging to a shared social and cultural community. The active engagement of citizens is part of that broader concept of citizenship, and the aim is that people take the project of shaping the future into their own hands.

Community action pursues rich aims in seeking to create a European lifelong educational area open to one and all; if everyone responds wholeheartedly, the promise of a Europe of Knowledge will become a reality. A deeper commitment lies behind these words - the affirmation of coherent set of democratic values and social practices which together respect both our similarities and our differences. In a time of fundamental change, we need the solid foundation which those values provide, for they underlie our recognition of the social reality of a globalised world in which the significance of active citizenship extends far beyond local communities and national frontiers.

The fostering of competencies and convictions capable of enhancing the quality of social relations rests on the natural alliance of education and training with equality and social justice. Citizenship with a European dimension is anchored in the shared creation of a voluntary community of peoples, of different cultures and of different traditions – the creation of a democratic society which has learned to embrace diversity sincerely as a positive opportunity, a society of openness and solidarity for each and every one of us. We have set sail on a fair course: as far as learning for active citizenship is concerned, Community action in the spheres of education, training and youth provides us with a substantial fund of experience. This report bears witness to what has been achieved to date and opens up navigable routes towards the future. My wish is that it should strike a chord amongst its readers - better still, that it should find spirited expression in the daily life of all involved.

I. Learning for citizenship with a European dimension 5

1. Introduction 5

1.1 Young citizens 6

1.2 Adult citizens 6

2. Towards a modernised concept and practice of active citizenship 8

2.1. Dimensions of citizenship in a changing Europe 8

2.2. Education, training and citizenship 9

2.3 An unfolding European dimension 10

3. Learning for active citizenship 12

3.1 A lifelong endeavour in a variety of contexts 12

3.2 Democratic and participatory learning 13

3.3 The added value of the European dimension 14

II. THE DG XXII CITIZENSHIP STUDY 16

1. Promoting learning for active citizenship 16

1.1 The action programmes as a facilitating framework 17

1.2 Project aims and rationales 19

1.3 Project target groups 21

1.4 The prominence of learning for active citizenship with a European dimension 22

1.5 Elements of good practice for projects 23

1.6 Recommendations for action programme guidelines and implementation 26

2. The contribution of the action programmes: examples 27

2.1 A youth exchange project in Poland 27

2.2 A co-operation network for in-service teacher training 28

2.3 Developing specialist training materials for volunteer work 29

2.4 An adult education project to support socially excluded women 29

2.5 A musical and dance performance in Finland 30

I. Learning for citizenship with a European dimension

1. Introduction

The 1997 Treaty of Amsterdam foresees the encouragement of a more active and participatory citizenship in the life of the Community, founded in an integrated approach to lifelong learning and based on the complementarity of Union citizenship and Member State citizenship. Bringing Europe closer to its citizens is a priority for future policy action; to this end, action in the field of education, training and youth offers a privileged vehicle for the promotion of active participation in Europe's rich diversity of cultures, economies, polities and societies.

As the 1995 White Paper Teaching and Learning: towards the Learning Society forcefully argues, contemporary economic and social change in Europe demands — in societies whose prime aim is the social inclusion of all its members, howsoever diverse they may be — the encouragement of an active and engaged citizenry possessing the skills and confidence to contribute as fully as possible to maintaining prosperity and improving the broader quality of life. The 1997 Study Group on Education and Training report Accomplishing Europe through Education and Training focuses on learning for citizenship as one of the key challenges facing the Union in the years to come. From a cultural and political point of view, European integration and the multi-ethnic/multi-lingual nature of our societies is recasting the human environment. This calls both for a revitalisation of democratic culture and a reconsideration of what it means to be a European citizen in the 21st century.

As the lessons drawn from the 1996 European Year of Lifelong Learning have underlined, this is a lifelong endeavour relevant to people of all ages and circumstances. At the same time, learning for citizenship also has a specific importance for young Europeans, whose participation in shaping and building the future is an irreplaceable resource. In the past twenty years, young people have been amongst those hardest hit by economic and social polarisation and transformation processes in all parts of Europe. High rates of youth unemployment together with weakening social benefits and entitlements have been amongst the most palpable consequences. In parallel, young people’s loss of trust in adult society and its established social and political institutions has been repeatedly documented.

Taking its cue from the Treaty of Amsterdam, the Commission Communication Towards a Europe of Knowledge places lifelong learning at the centre of an integrated approach to education, training and youth policy action. This approach rests on the conviction that "in a rapidly changing world, our society must offer all its citizens opportunities for acceding to the knowledge" which will enable them to progress throughout their lives. In responding to this challenge, three main orientations are given priority: enabling European citizens to continuously develop their fund of knowledge and skill through lifelong learning; encouraging a process of construction and enrichment of citizenship in an open and plural society; and enhancing employability based in competencies for a knowledge-based economy.

1.1 Young citizens

The 1997 Young Europeans Eurobarometer survey findings show a mixed picture of young people’s perspectives on the European Union and its meaning in their lives. There is an information, knowledge and skills gap on the part of many young people as far as the Union itself is concerned, but also in the more general terms of the demands of living in an integrated Europe. In particular, resources for meeting these demands are unequally spread across the Community’s youth population. Furthermore, their attachment to European integration is typically pragmatic and apolitical, with little sign of the enchantment the Community's founders hoped would lend a positive dynamic to learning to live together.

Now young people face a future in which an ageing Europe will call for an intensified intergenerational solidarity, whilst the power of young people’s political voice may risk being overheard in established representative democratic fora. Rekindling young people’s sense of belonging and engagement in the societies in which they live is an urgent task, for which a modernised approach to the concept and practice of citizenship can provide a sound basis. In the best case, this could help to engender the re-enchantment of Europe which President Santer hopes will inspire the Union as it embarks on a new phase of development in the coming years.

1.2 Adult citizens

With reference to adult citizens as a whole, the information available to date shows that exercise of the Union citizenship rights conferred on Member State nationals in the Maastricht Treaty has so far been disappointing. Apart from the need to demonstrate that Union citizenship is a substantive reality by ensuring the provisions of the Treaty are honoured in the Member States, it has become clear that citizens are neither sufficiently aware of their entitlements nor do they exercise these effectively. As a result, efforts to inform Union citizens of their rights have been renewed and extended.

Union citizenship is at an early stage of development in legal and political terms, and active citizenship comprises much more than the exercise of rights to freedom of movement in the Community, to consular representation abroad, to vote in countries other than one’s own and to make appeals and petitions to arbitrators. Furthermore, learning for citizenship in its broader sense requires more than access to information services alone. Nevertheless, these findings signal the need to bring European affairs closer to citizens’ concerns and to take more concerted action to facilitate more widespread and more active participation in the shaping of the Europe to come.

Encouraging active citizenship through education and training on a lifelong basis as a key objective of future policy action is an innovative enrichment of Community action in the field of education, training and youth. It comprises a logical next step for development, building on the achievements and experience gained from previous and existing action programmes and on the clear commitment of the European institutions to bring forward the goal of creating a Citizens’ Europe.

2. Towards a modernised concept and practice of active citizenship

2.1 Dimensions of citizenship in a changing Europe

Traditions and approaches to citizenship vary across Europe, but the basic idea of democratic citizenship in modern society is that active participation and commitment to one's chosen community support the creation of knowledge, responsibility, common identity and shared culture. The potential for practising active citizenship is structured in the first instance by a network of civic, social and political rights and entitlements, which, in the modern era, have gradually become more comprehensive in nature and have been extended to wider groups of people living in the jurisdiction of a given territory — in practice, most significantly that of the modern nation state.

Having the right to participate in economic, political and social life is not equivalent to doing so in practice, nor indeed being equipped to do so on equal terms. Neither do all individuals and groups see active participation in the same kind of way, and nor do they automatically agree with each other on what needs to be done, when, and how. The practice of active citizenship is therefore a question of being empowered to handle the practice of democratic culture, and feeling that one has a stake in getting involved in the communities in which one lives, whether by choice or force of circumstance. The concept of active citizenship ultimately speaks to the extent to which individuals and groups feel a sense of attachment to the societies and communities to which they theoretically belong, and is therefore closely related to the promotion of social inclusion and cohesion as well as to matters of identity and values. These are the affective dimensions of active citizenship. At the same time, people need a basis of information and knowledge upon which they can take action, and to do so with some confidence; this is the cognitive dimension of active citizenship. Finally, practising citizenship is about taking action of some kind, and this is above all a matter of gaining experience in doing so: the pragmatic dimension of active citizenship.

Until recently, the concept of citizenship has been more commonly understood in rather static and institutionally dominated terms: being a citizen was primarily a question of the legalities of entitlements and their political expression in democratic polities. The dimensions of identity and inclusion seemed to present few problems for the realisation of citizenship, in that European societies were understood to be essentially homogeneous in ethnic, cultural and linguistic terms — the presence of minorities notwithstanding. Internal difference and diversity may have been registered, but the dominance of majority 'national' ethnicity, culture and language remained largely unquestioned.

This is no longer so. Across the Community, the proportion of denizens living in the Member States is bound to rise in the decades to come as a consequence of mobility between Member States as well as inflows into the Community from outside, and the assertion of the right to difference by minority groups — indigenous or otherwise — is now a well-established feature of European social and political life. This means that learning to live positively with difference and diversity is becoming a core dimension of the practice of citizenship in Europe. It equally means that the concept of citizenship itself is shifting to a broader based notion, in which legal and social rights and entitlements continue to furnish an essential element, but in which negotiated and culturally-based understandings of citizenship are becoming more prominent.

The concept of citizenship is thereby becoming more fluid and dynamic, in conformity with the nature of European societies themselves. In this context, the practice of citizenship becomes more like a method of social inclusion, in the course of which people together create the experience of becoming the architects and actors of their own lives. Opportunities to learn and practise autonomy, responsibility, co-operation and creativity enable the development of a sense of personal worth and of expertise in confronting and tolerating ambiguities and oppositions.

In sum, this implies that a more holistic conception of citizenship is more appropriate to modern European society, which can incorporate legal, political and social elements as well as working critically with a foundation of diverse and overlapping values and identities. It is this very complexity and fluidity that enables the maintenance of a negotiated social integration that can adequately encompass all those who live in today's Europe and hence have a stake in its shape and future. This is a demanding agenda, because it requires that European citizens are able and willing to negotiate meanings and actions and to do so with a reflectively critical spirit; and it presupposes that no value or behaviour is prima facie excluded from scrutiny in that process. The practice of active citizenship is thus focused on the process of critical reflection, and is not automatically prestructured by a fixed list of norms and values. It is evident that under these circumstances, learning for citizenship is not an optional extra but is an integral part of the concept and practice of modern citizenship altogether.

2.2 Education, training and citizenship

The link between citizenship and education is a close one: in the first instance, the introduction of mass public education was certainly a key element in the emergence of modern citizenship, in that it provides a foundation for informed participation and integration. Given the nature of contemporary economic and social change, there is little question that people need to be equipped to manage their lives as best they may in the mosaic-like cultural and political environments in which they find themselves. Today’s challenge is therefore to determine what people need to be equipped with and how to equip them, as evenly as possible, with the information, knowledge, skills and qualities they need. This, in essence, is the justification for a pedagogic approach to citizenship: what do we need to do if we want to encourage both capacity and motivation to develop democratic and transnationally meaningful competence for all those living in Europe?

Here, the teaching of citizenship is not enough — it is the learning of citizenship which is essential. This must comprise not only the development of intercultural understanding (the affective level), but also the acquisition of operational competence (the cognitive level) — and both are best gained through practice and experience (the pragmatic level). Learning for active citizenship includes access to the skills and competencies that young people will need for effective economic participation under conditions of technological modernisation, economic globalisation, and, very concretely, transnational European labour markets. At the same time, the social and communicative competencies that are both part of new demands and which flow from changing work and study contexts are themselves of critical importance for living in culturally, ethnically and linguistically plural worlds. These competencies are not simply desirable for some, they are becoming essential for all.

2.3 An unfolding European dimension

To underwrite a holistic approach to the concept and practice of citizenship does not demote the importance of legal and political rights, at whatever constitutional level, but rather enriches the possibilities for promoting active citizenship with a European dimension.

The publication of the Adonnino Report in 1985 marked a milestone in the process of building a People’s Europe. Under the Treaty of Rome, Member States retained competence for defining and granting individual citizenship rights in accordance with their own differing traditions and laws. The 1973 Copenhagen summit recognised the need for the Community to develop a more integrated approach to international affairs, supported by a stronger sense of shared Community identity. This led to the provisions made for labour mobility, which remained in force until the Treaty of Maastricht introduced full freedom of movement for Community nationals in 1993 as one of the foundations of a complementary Union citizenship. In parallel, the political impulse provided by the 1973 Copenhagen summit equally prompted a chain of thinking about European identity and citizenship that culminated in the call to create a People’s Europe in 1985. The Treaty of Amsterdam, a decade later, has now concretely taken up this agenda.

It might be argued that the Community's approach towards citizenship has become all too dry and legalistic, and far too little palpable in practice. But Community action has long since begun to contribute to building active citizenship by encouraging and supporting communication, learning and participation between individuals, groups and networks across Member State borders. Nowhere is this more the case than for Community action programmes in the field of education, training and youth.

Under the current generation of action programmes, Socrates seeks to provide learners of all ages and social groups with insights into the European dimension of the subjects they study, to increase opportunities for personal experiences of other European countries, to develop a stronger sense of sharing a European identity, and to foster the ability to shape and adapt to changes in the economic and social environment. Specific actions under the Comenius strand aim explicitly to foster the sense of citizenship with a European dimension, both by curriculum development and exchange activities in schools and by a focus on the positive aspects of multi-culturality in order to support the learning situations of the children of migrant workers and minority groups.

Youth for Europe III addresses itself to young people in non-formal learning contexts, and aims to contribute to their educational process by supporting youth exchange activities and the development of youth work, with a special emphasis on facilitating the access of disadvantaged young people's participation. The programme explicitly aims to offer young people a concrete experience of European citizenship and thus to encourage them to become more active citizens. The European Voluntary Service pilot action introduced in 1996 is intended to contribute towards integrating young people into society in three ways: gaining broad skills within an educational experience, which furthers social and occupational integration; participation in useful activities for the benefit of local communities (humanitarian, social, ecological and cultural services); and strengthening bonds of solidarity at European level between citizens and organisations working in these fields.

The Leonardo da Vinci programme, for its part, aims to prepare for the 21st century by improving the quality of vocational training systems and their capacity for innovation. Taking a lifelong approach to training as an ongoing process that aims to ensure both personal development and professional integration, the programme's spirit sees the development of human resources as a key factor for Europe's future economic and social well-being.

A study commissioned by DG XXII has now examined the contribution of the present education, training and youth action programmes to the development of active citizenship with a European dimension in practice. Its findings, which are summarised in the second part of this working document, broadly conclude that current action programmes offer considerable scope for the promotion of learning for active citizenship, and that the European dimension is an important asset to that end. Community education, training and youth programmes can support individuals and groups to exercise active citizenship by providing opportunities to gain and practise technical and social skills for professional, personal and civic life. Marginalised groups deserve particular consideration in this respect, but within the context of a mainstreaming approach to learning processes relevant for all citizens, whatever their age or circumstances. This process can take root most effectively at the local level in the first instance, where the European dimension acts as a catalyst for reflection upon the meanings of community participation and identity ‘close to home’. Confidence in oneself and one’s local community culture is a prerequisite for a confident and positive response to others, which is an important factor in building the foundation for developing a sense of involvement and inclusion in wider regional, national and European communities. Not only in form, but most importantly in substance, constructing European citizenship is interdependent with and complementary to local/regional communities of identity and national citizenship affiliations. This underlines the importance of effective action in favour of learning for active citizenship in the next generation of Community education, training and youth programmes.

3. Learning for active citizenship

3.1 A lifelong endeavour in a variety of contexts

Learning for active citizenship can be described as a process of critical accompaniment in which individuals are offered structured opportunities - at cognitive, affective and pragmatic levels - to gain and renew the skills of self-directed participation and to experience the negotiation of social purpose and meaning. By its nature, this learning process is a continuous one that is relevant to individuals throughout their lives, and also one which can and should take place in a variety of contexts.

This means that learning for active citizenship builds upon, but moves significantly beyond, the more familiar concepts and practices of civic and political/social education provided in formal schooling contexts for young people. This element of the curriculum is provided in differing ways and at different stages, but typically places emphasis on cognitive teaching and learning: young people acquire information and knowledge about democratic institutions and practices in their own national, regional and local contexts together with the practical skills of life management in complex modern societies. These are indispensable elements of learning for active citizenship, but they cannot alone suffice, in that

• many adult citizens lack relevant information, skills and confidence as well as access to opportunities for participation and engagement in the first place;

• non-formal teaching and learning contexts, in particular those linked with associative life and civil society, can often more readily incorporate affective and pragmatic with cognitive learning;

• the rising significance of communicative and intercultural skills together with the capacity to respond positively to rapidly changing environments extends the scope and relevance of learning for active citizenship altogether.

Youth work, adult and community education and the continuing training sector have considerable experience and competence in these matters; their work has received considerable support through DG XXII action programmes and through the 1996 European Year of Lifelong Learning. Lifelong learning is a positive framework for bringing together the complementary strengths of the formal and non-formal education and training sectors and for extending the scope of learning for active citizenship to all groups in the community.

3.2 Democratic and participatory learning

Placing learners and learning at the centre of education and training methods and processes is by no means a new idea, but in practice, the established framing of pedagogic practices in most formal contexts has privileged teaching rather than learning. Teachers traditionally convey the knowledge they possess to learners, who subsequently must show what they have learned. In this approach, teaching is largely proactive, whereas learning is largely reactive. The purpose of the process is essentially to convey content, and the core problem is to find the most effective teaching methods for doing so. Learners certainly participate in this process, but the extent of self-direction and co-determination they may bring to it is inevitably circumscribed.

In a high-technology knowledge society, this kind of teaching-learning relation loses efficacy: learners must become proactive and more autonomous, prepared to renew their knowledge continuously and to respond constructively to changing constellations of problems and contexts. The teacher’s role becomes one of accompaniment, facilitation, mentoring, support and guidance in the service of learners’ own efforts to access, use - and ultimately create - knowledge. This means that learners become active participants in their own learning processes, which they learn to negotiate and co-manage together with their teacher-guides and with their co-learners.

The significance of this kind of approach for learning for active citizenship is self-evident. Where the content of what is being taught and learned stands in contradiction to the way in which it is being taught and learned, the meaning of the learning process becomes ambiguous. Therefore, democratic and participatory pedagogies are especially important: they constitute the very essence of what is to be learned and practised. For this reason, too, the rich experience of non-formal youth and adult education and training is of particular value. Less consistently subject to the demands of assessment and certification and supported by the voluntary nature of learners’ participation, these sectors have found it easier to develop and maintain symmetrical relations between teachers and learners. Similarly, youth workers and education/training practitioners working in these sectors have been able to develop a professional ethos in which pedagogic skills take priority vis-à-vis specialist expertise in a recognised field of knowledge. In supporting the development of learning for active citizenship, the valorisation, exchange and dissemination of good practice in these sectors is likely to make a significant contribution.

3.3 The added value of the European dimension

In today’s Europe, learning for active citizenship is a key education and training issue at all levels of community life. At the same time, participation and inclusion can most readily be engendered and experienced in contexts close to people’s everyday lives, most especially at local level. What, then, is the added value of the European dimension?

Firstly, the explicit support offered by education, training and youth action programmes to the promotion of learning for active citizenship underlines that participation and inclusion do not end at national borders. Active citizenship with a European dimension implies not simply being aware of and effectively exercising the rights and responsibilities enjoyed by citizens of the Union, but also affirming the principles of and gaining the skills required to live in plural societies that are constructed through multifaceted difference. This is the context in which the Commission Green Paper on the European Dimension of Education specified that the added value of Community action lies, inter alia, in contributing to "a European citizenship based on the shared values of interdependence, democracy, equality of opportunity and mutual respect" for different cultural and ethnic identities and to educating people "for democracy, for the fight against inequality, to be tolerant and to respect diversity." These principles are pursued, in appropriately accented ways, in the current generation of action programmes, and similarly find a central place in the aims of the European Voluntary Service pilot scheme, which "in implicating young people directly into activities serving the common interest [ and] in encouraging their sense of citizenship and solidarity within a European perspective" seeks to promote their social and vocational integration.

Secondly, education, training and youth activities supported by Community action programmes are founded in transnational co-operation and exchange. The stimulus provided by the confrontation and engagement with complexity and difference that such activities inherently involve means that they comprise a privileged channel for intercultural learning. Taking the ‘detour’ of transnationality acts as a specific pedagogic device, whose purpose is to facilitate critical reflection on the self, identity and everyday life. From this point of view, access to active citizenship at the European level is built upon the development of a more considered awareness of local, regional and national identities and contexts. This awareness, in turn, can result from gaining knowledge of life in other parts of the Community and working together with people who are in some ways different from oneself. Whilst this kind of perspective on learning for active citizenship has been perhaps most readily associated with school, university and youth exchange programmes, it is no less important in the context of initial vocational training and continuing education and training for adults. Interculturality and transnationality have already become a regular element of some Europeans’ working lives, and in the future, this will become the case for many more, whether through direct mobility on a European-wide labour market, through virtual mobility in the workplaces of the Information Society, or simply through living in one of Europe’s increasingly multi-ethnic societies.

The coming generation of Community action in the field of education, training and youth should therefore help to create the preconditions for the practice of active citizenship by supporting activities that inform and empower people of all ages and all circumstances to take their lives into their own hands; to contribute, as best they may, to the lives of their communities; and to respect and value the lives and contributions of those around them. In the words of the report Accomplishing Europe, the mission is to muster the people of Europe to take on one of the greatest challenges of all time in together constructing democratically a peaceful and integrated Europe. In the course of this process, a sense of citizenship will emerge from the new social relations that its peoples consciously establish between themselves, in a plural and humanitarian society in which all can take a responsible part in the debates and the choices to be made. To make headway in meeting this challenge, education and training must become a positive ally in promoting learning for active citizenship, whose conscious European dimension expresses the conviction that all those who live in Europe deserve to feel they hold a positive stake in their societies and communities.

II. THE DG XXII CITIZENSHIP STUDY

1. promoting learning for active citizenship: main outcomes

Background to the study

This study was commissioned in view of the interest shown by the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) discussions in human and social rights and responsibilities; the emphasis given by the White Paper Teaching and Learning: Towards the Learning Society to the challenges and the consequences of economic, social and technological change for education and training; the identification of the construction of European citizenship as a key issue in the report of the Study Group on Education and Training Accomplishing Europe through Education and Training; the outcomes of the 1996 European Year of Lifelong Learning, which highlighted the fact that the acquisition and continued practice of active citizenship is not necessarily restricted to a particular phase of life, but is a learning process that continues and is renewed throughout people's lives; and the opportunity to examine the issues at hand through the activities supported by the current generation of education, training and youth action programmes.

The aim of this transversal study has therefore been to uncover and distil the different ways in which the educational and training activities supported through DG XXII action programmes contribute to strengthening the basis for the practice of active citizenship. The ways in which they contribute to making the European dimension of citizenship a meaningful and concrete reality in people’s lives was of particular interest.

The study as a whole was divided into five ‘area studies’, each of which covers a cluster of countries, and was complemented by the production of an integrated report which draws together their perspectives and findings. The area studies primarily used qualitative case-study methods. A limited number of funded projects were systematically selected, reflecting a contrasting range of the potential contributions to education/training for active citizenship that such projects may make. An appropriate balance between action programmes, types of project and countries has been sought.

Main outcomes

The area studies final reports provide a rich source of empirical detail, including case-study fiches giving considerable detail on the aims, methods and activities of the projects included in the sample. No substantive detail is included here; the main issues arising from the area studies and the synthesis report as a whole are presented in summary form.

1.1 The action programmes as a facilitating framework

• The most significant contribution made by the programmes is their promotion of transnational and intercultural co-operation and exchange, not only in the eyes of project promoters/leaders and participants but also in the activities that are carried out in that context.

Within this, personal contacts through exchange and mobility are the most valuable element. When well-prepared and followed through, these experiences prompt a chain of thinking which begins with a new awareness of the broader human and social environment and its complexities. This encourages a more critical questioning of the taken-for-granted of one’s own cultural and social environment, which then facilitates thinking about difference and diversity in more measured ways. This becomes the key to accessing European dimensions of participation and inclusion, and thus to promoting active citizenship within the European context as well as at local, regional and national levels of experience.

• The action programmes do provide space for - and indeed do encourage the use of - democratic and participatory learning approaches and the combination of cognitive, affective and pragmatic levels of learning. However, projects take up these opportunities for innovation and experimentation with methods of teaching and learning to rather variable extents.

A range of factors are likely to be associated with their likelihood of doing so. The action programme under which they have been funded may act as a mediating factor, in that the aims and contexts of projects funded by each programme obviously vary. So, for example, the Leonardo projects included in the study are inclined to focus on cognitive learning and on the economic dimension of citizenship in terms of equipping people to adapt and respond more proactively to the demands of changing labour markets and new technologies. Socrates and Youth for Europe (YfE) projects place their accents on the political and social dimensions of citizenship, which characteristically translates into providing information and promoting debate on cultural, historical, political and social issues, encouraging the development of communicative and intercultural skills, and stimulating the motivation for active participation and for mobility itself. YfE projects seem to engender high levels of affective learning alongside their cognitive and pragmatic elements, whereas Socrates projects seem inclined to balance cognitive and affective elements relatively evenly.

Projects for younger children were less likely to emphasise democratic participation and involvement in project planning and implementation than were those for their elders (and some of the best practice on this dimension was found in projects designed with low-income and unemployed adults in mind). This coincides with the lesser likelihood of projects sited in the formal education sector to engage participants in co-management of activities. This does not a priori imply that formal and informal contexts have different levels of potential for generating learning for citizenship, but rather that the nature of their potential contribution probably differs: the context of learning is an important framing condition for deciding what it is possible to do and how best to do it. Nevertheless "there are some examples of young people’s involvement in informal sector project co-management which might serve as useful models for other target groups and programmes" (p.57, synthesis report).

• Insofar as learning for active citizenship can now be seen as a lifelong endeavour relevant for people of all ages and circumstances, and to be an appropriate aim across the range of learning contexts, then the action programmes may need to rebalance the profiles of projects they fund in the coming years.

Reviewing the action programme compendia to select appropriate projects to include in the study showed that it was far easier to find suitable projects based in formal learning contexts and directed primarily at young people than to locate projects directed at adult learners and/or taking place in vocational education and training settings. From the 77 potentially relevant projects culled from the programme compendia, Leonardo provided 13, Socrates 43 and Youth for Europe 21. This is a logical consequence of the different foci, priorities and also the resourcing base of the action programmes. YfE, for example, probably offers the widest scope for selecting suitable projects in relation to the promotion of active citizenship, most particularly in non-formal settings - but the programme’s target group is quite specifically young people and young adults up to the age of 25/27, and its resource base is also much smaller in scale than that of Leonardo or Socrates, which inevitably places narrower limits on the number of projects it is able to fund. The Comenius strand of Socrates is also a rich source of appropriate projects, because it includes explicit actions in favour of promoting European citizenship - however, the rationale for Comenius means these are likely to be school-based (whether for teachers or for pupils). The present foci and accents of the action programmes also reflect, of course, the development and implementation of civic/political and citizenship education in the Member States, which, by and large, has been strongest in initial general education settings and seen as particularly important for young people.

"There are currently some clear distinctions in the roles played by general and vocational education in learning for active citizenship. General education tends to focus on the political, social and democratic aspects of citizenship and often overlooks economic aspects of citizenship in explicit project content. Nevertheless, by acquiring an education and developing skills, students are enhancing their economic competitiveness. ... On the other hand, there are a number of vocational education projects which promote economic integration but do not necessarily address other aspects of learning for active citizenship. In such projects the European dimension is often incidental ... Given the need to prepare citizens to take an active part in society and to respond to rapid change and development, projects which address a range of dimensions of citizenship are likely to be the most valuable. The research suggests that participants in general education would benefit from projects which address economic aspects of citizenship and those in vocational education would also be advantaged by broader projects which also address political, social and democratic aspects. " (p.58, synthesis report)

1.2 Project aims and rationales

• The projects included in the study covered a wide range of themes, but they could all be linked to the issues arising from contemporary modernisation processes in Europe. The most significant of these are:
• the effects of social and economic polarisation and marginalisation upon those groups most affected (in particular, young people and minority/migrant groups): what can be done to counter their exclusion and lack of participation in society and economy?
• the effects of the growing ‘internationalisation’ of European societies and cultures (multiculturality, multi-ethnicity, mobility/migration, globalised communications, ...): what can be done to counter the negative aspects (racism/xenophobia, discrimination) and promote the positive aspects (intercultural experience, tolerance/respect for diversity, synergy from complementarities and working together ...)?
• the effects of growing complexity and opacity of social and political processes in the context of European integration together with regional and local differentiation: what can be done to enhance not only levels of information and skill but also levels of engagement and participation in all forms of democratic culture?
• the effects of human action on the environment as a transnational and global challenge: what can be done to prevent further environmental degradation and to maintain quality of life?

Some area studies found that one or another of these issues seemed especially prominent for the sample of projects they looked at. For example, the ‘southern European’ area study (Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain) identified growing internationalisation as an especially central issue, and related this to the structuring context of countries experiencing a rapid shift from ‘cultures of emigration to cultures of immigration’. The researchers saw promoting social inclusion to be the key issue addressed by their sample of projects. This was expressed in project aims and activities in terms of breaking down ethnocentrism and discrimination whilst encouraging tolerance and diversity as core elements of the European dimension of citizenship.

• These issues were likely to be translated into four kinds of learning aims, which are:

• acquiring the information and knowledge to deconstruct stereotypical judgements and to discover commonalities and complementarities between different social, cultural and national groups;

• acquiring and practising the kinds of personal, social and technical skills that enable people to participate more effectively in their local communities and in the context of European integration and broader economic and social change;

• personally experiencing encounter and confrontation with the unfamiliar and the different (spaces, places, people) to prompt the ‘chain of critical reflection’ referred to earlier (in section 1.1);

• embarking on a journey of personal discovery and development as part of the ongoing search for identity in a complex and individualised world.

• The projects ultimately included in the five area studies can be divided into four broad types (but some projects span types, even though their primary purpose is usually identifiable):
• mobility projects: transnational and intercultural experience to widen horizons and prompt reflection
• training projects: learning activities for gaining new knowledge and skills
• production projects: creating an information or communication product as a team
• networking projects: developing channels for transnational links and exchange of ideas/practices
• Projects seeking to make a contribution to learning for citizenship included some of the following elements of content:

• explicit emphasis on human dignity and human rights as fundamental values

• knowledge and experience of democratic institutions and decision-making

• critical appraisal of the media

• skills to combat social marginalisation/exclusion

• sense of belonging at different levels of community (local, national, European) and of solidarity and responsibility towards one’s communities

• understanding of the processes leading to prejudice and discrimination against minorities and the ‘different’

• developing intercultural experiences and skills

• application of environmental values and sustainable development

"The training programme to support socially excluded families contributes to women’s active citizenship by providing workshops for low income and unskilled women designed to empower them to participate more widely in society beyond the household. Through the development of general learning skills, reflection and discussion of the shortcomings of present social conditions, it aims to provide basic knowledge and tools for participation in the local community. The methodology of the workshops and the emphasis on the participation of the women themselves make this a project which highlights a particular pedagogical approach to education for active citizenship where learners are encouraged to participate in the learning processes rather than one which promotes a specific content." (p.43, synthesis report)

1.3 Project target groups

• The kinds of participants served by the projects included in the study can be summatively described as follows:

age/generation status

young people adults

weak/marginalised 2 4

social location

strong/mainstream 1 3

• Participants in group 1 are typically pupils and students in full-time education and training and/or young adults actively involved in youth associative life; this is probably the group that has benefited most from opportunities to participate in Community education, training and youth programmes over the years.

• The young people in group 2 now represent a general priority for the current generation of action programmes, so that many projects focus on attracting the young unemployed, young people belonging to ethnic minorities and from migrant backgrounds, the young disabled, and those young people living in particularly disadvantaged circumstances and localities.

• Group 3 is populated most particularly by the ‘mediators and multipliers’, i.e., teachers, trainers, youth and community workers and related personnel. There are provisions for co-operation, exchange and mobility for these groups in all the action programmes; and ‘training the trainers’ is increasingly regarded as an important area for action.

• Group 4 brings together adults in similar situations to the marginalised youth of group 2.

• Three observations emerge from the study’s findings:
• group 4 is probably least well-served at the moment by projects funded under the action programmes;
• current Community actions may not be catering well for the ‘ordinary citizen’, i.e. those falling into group 3 but who are not professionally involved in education and training;
• the action programmes’ commitment to furthering equal opportunities between the sexes does not yet seem to be sufficiently reflected in the range of projects relevant to the theme of learning for active citizenship:

"Relatively few projects address the specific citizenship needs of women, and some projects aimed at young people within informal settings seem to have a bias towards male participants. It is perhaps surprising, given the Commission’s commitment to equal opportunities, that projects which make a formal commitment to gender equality, for example by ensuring that equal numbers of males and females are recruited, are unusual." (p.51, synthesis report)

• Two of the area studies looked more closely at what projects offered to ‘weaker’ and ‘stronger’ target groups:

• What could be termed ‘reactive’ projects are more likely to be designed for the marginalised: these place more emphasis on personal development, on acquiring the information and skills needed to resist their marginalisation and to participate actively on their own terms, and are oriented towards participants’ local communities and immediate problems.
• Projects designed for other groups are more inclined to be ‘proactive’ in nature: they place the accent on contributing to social and community development, are often engaged in producing resources or providing services for others, and incorporate more explicitly the development of a European dimension to learning for citizenship.

1.4 The prominence of learning for active citizenship with a European dimension

• The area studies all found that in practice, it could not be said that the majority of the projects they looked at had a primary, explicit and concrete orientation towards learning for active citizenship.

The term ‘citizenship’ may have been included in applications and project self-descriptions, but this did not necessarily translate into specific aims and clearly identifiable activities on the ground. As is the case for other key concepts included in action programmes’ guidelines, the term ‘citizenship’ may on occasion be used as an available ‘peg’ around which to construct a project for which European-level funding is sought. To some extent, this is probably inevitable; but in this particular case, all the researchers underlined that few of those with whom they spoke - including project promoters and co-ordinators - were able to articulate clearly just what active citizenship with a European dimension meant for them. In addition, those running such projects frequently remarked that in their view, ‘European’ topics and concerns are too distanced from project participants’ lives to be seen by them as relevant and attractive as such; project activities, including their transnational elements, have to be related to the immediate community context if they are to be effective.

• Nevertheless, the area studies could themselves identify some of the work projects were doing as being relevant to learning for active citizenship and making some contribution to this agenda, albeit in implicit and emergent ways and often in terms of developing the potential for future learning (which may or may not be realised).

This potential is expressed most clearly in the opportunities provided by supporting transnational and intercultural co-operation, exchange and mobility; in the stimulation produced by participants’ awareness that Europe ‘exists’ (insofar as they know their activities are funded by Community action programmes); and where the opportunities for using innovative teaching and learning methods and contexts are positively taken up by project personnel.

Overall, where personal contacts between partners are part of project activities, where products/resources are co-operatively developed and exchanged, and where everyone involved knows that their activities are being supported by an EU action programme, it is likely that strengthened identification with a European dimension to people’s identities and lives will emerge quasi-spontaneously. This could be seen as setting the stage for active citizenship with a European dimension; but, as the area studies reports underline, these benefits may well be of a short-term nature only if they are not subsequently supported and developed further.

The ‘European dimension’ of such projects is best seen in terms of the ways in which the transnational element gives an impulse and motivation to citizens whose lives are largely experienced at local level. It is at this level that most people will be able to appreciate the meaning of active citizenship for themselves and their communities, and therefore projects are more likely to be successful in teaching and learning terms if they can build ‘two-way bridges’ between the local and the transnational:

"Our research confirms that many people (perhaps most) are only able to articulate their understandings of citizenship at local levels, but that a project is a community where participation can develop: a transnational project achieving this contributes to a sense of belonging to Europe. ... This is not to overlook the European dimension of active citizenship, but to place it in the context of people’s everyday experience." (pp.v, 15, synthesis report)

1.5 Elements of good practice for projects

• The area studies broadly conclude that effective projects are those which
• incorporate multidimensional aspects of active citizenship (cultural, economic, political and social);
• use innovative and participatory teaching and learning methods which combine cognitive, affective and pragmatic levels in a judicious and balanced way;
• place a commitment to core European values at the centre of their concerns (democratic culture, humanitarianism and social justice, respect and tolerance for diversity and difference, ...);

• and balance self-direction with professional guidance and supervision.

• Facilitative ‘contextual’ factors include the presence of project co-ordinators who are themselves highly committed to developing the European dimension in their work and who possess charismatic qualities which inspire others. The availability of supportive infrastructural resources which enable projects to cope with the technical and administrative difficulties they may encounter is also important, although projects may be well-advised to ensure their activities are not ‘swallowed up’ by the broader agendas of organisations with which they are affiliated, making their specific concerns and contributions more difficult to realise.

• Effective teaching and learning strategies used by projects include:
• exchange visits: for critical reflection, widening horizons, and recognising the potential for change; of particular value for marginalised/excluded groups
• embedded in-service training: for reflecting/developing skills in working with the disadvantaged, and for networking/liaising with fellow practitioners elsewhere
• participant involvement in development and management of projects: for learning and practising democratic and participative skills in a ‘low threshold’ context
• research-action approach: focusing on barriers to active citizenship relevant to the participants’ personal lives
• product focus: working together towards a concrete goal, gaining technical and human skills along the way.

• Proposals for good practice criteria include:

• ensure clarity of aims and a concrete methodological framework for their achievement;
• profile the contribution made by European-level funding to the project;

• allow time and space at the outset to reflect and to establish a sense of common purpose and direction between project partners;

• do not over-extend the number of partners, but focus on building a solid basis for co-operation with a manageable partnership team;

• construct projects around definable social issues and/or identifiable products to attract and maintain participant commitment;

• include direct personal contacts and exchanges between partners wherever feasible, but match the transnational component appropriately to the needs and circumstances of the target group;
• adapt specialist languages to the world of everyday practice;

• design flexible but structured learning contexts and processes;

• use methods that place participants directly into situations where they can practise the skills of active citizenship (in particular, active learning and collaborative work on concrete issues) and which promote the confrontation/negotiation of viewpoints;

• ensure a continuing solid level of guidance and support throughout the project to ensure focus and quality is maintained;

• introduce participant-based evaluation mechanisms.

• This means that effective projects are those in which:

• the learning focus is neither solely on identities and feelings (although as a starting-point this can be effective) nor solely on information and rights (essential as these are for the exercise of active citizenship), but rather, there is balanced emphasis upon these complementary aspects of learning;

• participants learn to find the information they need actively, rather than being supplied with it by project leaders/trainers;

• participants have opportunities to practise the citizenship skills they are gaining by sharing in project management, planning and development;

• when the target participant group can be described as disadvantaged/marginalised: explicitly participatory strategies are used in designing and implementing activities, so that projects work with participants rather than for them;

• where the target participant group is children/young people rather than adults, active involvement in the processes of project development is equally built in;

• when the aim is to focus on the barriers to active citizenship stemming from racism and structural inequalities: (a) participants are encouraged to consider the experiences and identities of both the disadvantaged/marginalised and those belonging to the ‘majority’ group/s in their communities, and (b) personal learning processes are foreseen (as in the study of personal biographies and family histories);

• the formal aim to contribute to learning for citizenship corresponds to a genuine commitment to doing so in practice, rather than a simple response to stated action programme priorities and funding categories;

• those running the projects know and share the values and aims of those who designed them in the first place, to avoid the risk of discontinuity between funding acquisition and project implementation on the ground;

• the European dimension of the project is valorised and profiled, so that participants know where (part of) their project funding has come from and that the transnational aspect of project activities is an essential learning element in its own right;

• the organisational environment in which a project is based permits accountability and dissemination of outcomes;

• where the target participant group is professional ETY practitioners and/or where the aim is to produce teaching/training materials: follow-up and evaluation procedures are built in so that (a) the potentially significant multiplier effect of such projects can be monitored, and (b) best practice can be accumulated and replicated elsewhere.

• The area study researchers held differing views on the following three issues, which therefore deserve wider discussion:

• The effectiveness of small-scale autonomous groups working ‘close to the ground’ is uncontested, but they are disadvantaged by their detachment from more institutionalised frameworks of professional and administrative support. But are well-established organisations better-equipped to run action projects more reliably? Or should new forms of infrastructural support be developed to mediate between funders and funding recipients?

• The appropriateness of democratic and participatory learning approaches and methods is uncontested, but left to themselves, projects designed and carried through without the benefit of professional guidance and support are also vulnerable to loss of direction and counter-productive outcomes. What is the appropriate balance between self-direction and professional management? What kinds of innovative guidance and support services could be developed in this context?

• The prioritisation given in the action programmes to ensuring the participation of disadvantaged and marginalised groups in the activities they fund and to including projects specifically directed towards their needs and demands is uncontested. But is it ultimately more effective to concentrate more resources and efforts on activities designed for ‘mediators and multipliers’, who may be readier to engage with a European dimension to their lives and identities and who will themselves develop appropriate learning opportunities at local, regional and national levels? Alternatively, is it better to focus resources and efforts above all on the more vulnerable, in the sense that the social integration of potentially marginalised groups is a first and very important step towards active citizenship per se? And what is the role of the ‘ordinary mainstream citizen’ in this field of action - would it be better to focus effort on reaching them as a matter of urgency, given the gap that appears to have opened up between the broad sweep of citizenry and the project of European integration?

• Many of these conclusions are, of course, relevant for the development of good practice criteria in relation to projects funded by the action programmes more generally, and not only those which are making a contribution to learning for active citizenship.

1.6 Recommendations for action programme guidelines and implementation

• Action programme vademeca could profitably strengthen the emphasis given to learning for active citizenship across the board; brochures with examples of good practice could be prepared to assist national agencies and project promoters.

• The administrative complexity of securing funding and running projects must be simplified, in order to open up access to wider sections of the population and to facilitate the participation of smaller-scale groupings.

• The concept of added value should be defined more clearly and used more consistently in programme planning and evaluation cycles in order to show unequivocally the distinctive contribution that is made by Community support and action.

• More thought should be given to specifying when and where shorter and longer term outcomes are sought, with appropriate consequences for project selection and evaluation criteria.

• Give greater priority to the ‘training of trainers’ in this field: mediators and multipliers are themselves aware of their need for more knowledge and a greater range of pedagogic skills, especially in relation to working with disadvantaged and marginalised groups.

• Develop channels for linking projects into more durable and mobilisable networks from which they can individually benefit but equally to which they can contribute their experience and expertise.

• Promote the development of frameworks and guidelines for a democratic (collegial and participant based) audit system for projects funded by the programmes.

2. The contribution of the action programmes : examples

2.1 A youth exchange project in Poland

The Youth for Europe programme enables all young people to participate in building Europe together. The activities it supports are designed to teach the values of tolerance, democracy and active citizenship. One of the actions supports youth exchanges with non-member countries.

Co-ordinated by an Irish youth organisation, this project brought together 22 young people from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Hungary and Poland for a week in March 1997. The Youth for Europe grant covered about two-thirds of project costs. Workshops on identity, health, international dialogue, and combating racism were organised, accompanied by social gatherings and visits to local youth projects. The choice of partner countries was highly strategic, and channels were set up so that each participant could link up with the others according to the topic they were interested in discussing further. The project’s success was very much a result of careful planning by the youth organisation, together with the co-ordinator’s strong personal commitment.

The exchange visit certainly made the participants more aware of what they share with other young people in Europe, irrespective of where they live. The group ranged from unemployed school leavers to higher education graduates, and despite their language, cultural and political differences, the experience helped them to learn to respect their diversities. At the end of the project, they formulated a common position statement which concluded that « We have different cultures and different skin colours, traditions, but we have the same blood and feelings ».

Interestingly, the project facilitated a more astute and dynamic recognition of exclusion and inclusion amongst the participants. Two of the participating countries are not Member States, which raised the initial question of who is included in and excluded from what kinds of opportunities and experiences - but the young people rapidly realised that things are more complex, in that those from Member States ‘on the peripheries’ of the European Union might also experience a sense of exclusion. They began to see inclusion and exclusion as a set of interdependent relationships, within which all individuals and communities are implicated in differing ways. The participants did not approach these issues through ‘facts and figures’, but rather through the vectors of their own experiences and sense of identity in relation to each other. This process of shared discovery was a crucial factor in their emerging positive acceptance of together being part of the European community as a whole and their recognition that they do have opportunities to work together and participate in building a shared future. The co-ordinator’s report recorded that the most significant outcome lay in a learning process which brought the participants towards « seeing themselves and others in a new way. They acquired an increased self-esteem and an openness towards others. They realised that as a living person they always need to learn, but also that they can learn . »

This project is a good example of how cross-cultural encounters and exchanges can encourage participants to reflect more closely on their own experience and their own community. The knowledge and skills gained through the transnational element of the projects enhance, and perhaps guarantee, the promotion of active citizenship at local level. Information about and experience of another country, or indeed of Europe more broadly, strengthens the awareness among participants of their own life circumstances and of their own community context. Hosting visitors from abroad enables participants to see their own community through the eyes of a visitor, which can lead to developing new insights and perspectives on one’s own society and culture. Similarly, travel abroad, when appropriately educationally framed, encourages new perspectives on self and others. Participants see the possibility of alternative approaches to problems and, most importantly, the potential for change, either in their own lives or in that of their communities. No longer are one’s own experience and interpretations an unquestioned taken-for-granted fact of life, but become one of number of possibilities. This, in itself, is likely to facilitate tolerance and understanding of others. These kinds of learning processes are an important foundation for the practice of active citizenship.

2.2 A co-operation network for in-service teacher training

The Socrates programme seeks to promote European co-operation and improve the quality of education through transnational partnerships. The programme’s specific objectives include developing the European and intercultural dimensions of education at all levels, so as to strengthen the spirit of European citizenship. Comenius, the school education chapter of the action programme, supports in-service training activities for educational staff.

In 1994, a French local education authority initiated a co-operation network which now covers participants from some eleven countries. The aim is to promote the development of environmental education in a European context. The network provides in-service training for the teachers involved, and, through cross-curricular projects on agreed themes, teachers and pupils from different countries can exchange ideas and outcomes of their work. In 1996/7, the network received a grant for a project linking environmental education with citizenship education. Two school classes in France co-operated with a Dutch and an Italian school class to work on the themes of water quality and public transport. The idea was that an interdisciplinary environmental project would raise both pupil and teacher awareness of complex issues of global relevance, thus encouraging the recognition of shared concerns and responsibilities across national boundaries. Active learning and project-based work methods complement these learning aims, in that they reflect the democratic values and processes which underpin and enable the practice of active citizenship in classroom life.

Case-studies such as this one provide evidence for the value of institutionally-based networking initiatives for the integration of modest projects at local levels into a communications framework and the professional support these can provide by sharing expertise, experience and resources. The transnational element offers added value in a number of ways. In this particular example, it is of central significance for the educational theme. But transnationality also brings indirect benefits of wider relevance. It provides, in the first instance, an extra dimension to learning contexts, which are enriched through exposure to other languages and cultures. Equally, the active communication and shared learning experiences that are part of the curriculum design and implementation of such projects encourage the sense of belonging to a wider community, and hence help to build a real basis for the growth of a European dimension to identity.

2.3 Developing specialist training materials for volunteer workers

The Leonardo da Vinci programme aims to enable young people, employees and companies to face the challenges posed by today’s rapid technological and industrial changes through innovation, co-operation and partnership in initial and continuing vocational training. One of the types of measures it funds are transnational pilot projects which devise, develop and test out training materials, methods and modules.

In a three-year project that began in 1995, the Portuguese Red Cross, in co-operation with its sister organisations in Spain and Finland, launched a project to develop a training package to prepare volunteers to work as animateurs with the young disabled and disadvantaged. The volunteers needed training to help such young people gain the skills they need to plan their lives and futures more effectively. The approach behind the training package is based on ways of providing the disabled with more independence and greater opportunities for social and economic participation. Particular emphasis is placed on gaining skills for engaging in open and distance learning, self-directed studies, and for working independently from one’s home. This project therefore contributes to learning for active citizenship in two ways - not only by improving the scope for social and economic integration for the young disabled themselves, but also by equipping those who are ready to engage in voluntary work with the skills to do so with greater assurance and effectiveness.

This case-study is an example of projects with potentially strong multiplier effects. Its strategy is anchored in distance learning and self-training, and the training package will be made available across Europe. But equally, this particular project has considerable potential in encouraging active citizenship for a group whose opportunities for economic and social participation are often overlooked. Social inclusion and its centrality to people’s access to active citizenship is a prominent concern in the product-based projects surveyed for this study, all of which endeavour, using different forms of communication channels, to reach and to empower particular kinds of individuals and communities. Enhancing knowledge and skills lies at the heart of these kinds of projects, on the basis that these are the sine qua non for personal autonomy and active participation.

This approach also underlines the contribution that Community action in the vocational training field can make to the promotion of active citizenship, because it emphasises the continuing importance of economic participation (effectively, for most people, paid work) for access to and exercise of rights and responsibilities. In a knowledge economy and a learning society, the acquisition and renewal of marketable skills are, more than ever before, the key to labour market and occupational integration. Social inclusion remains closely linked to economic inclusion, so that active citizenship is realised in practice against a background of the interrelationships between the social and economic dimensions of people’s lives.

2.4 An adult education project to support socially excluded women

The Socrates programme seeks to respond to the growing demand for lifelong learning by supporting adult education activities across a wide range of general, cultural and social dimensions (thus complementing the continuing training activities supported under the Leonardo programme). This action is open to a wide range of formal and non-formal organisations and associations whose educational provision is designed to be accessible to all adult learners, irrespective of their prior experience and qualifications.

During 1994/5, a partnership between the Spanish Federation of Popular Universities and the Ministry of Education co-ordinated an adult education project which involved eight Member States (Spain, Greece, France, Denmark, Ireland, Norway, Portugal and the UK). The Socrates adult education action funded about half of the costs of the project, in which some 140 low income and unskilled women participated. The idea was to link learning with empowerment, so that women gained both skills and confidence to participate in the social world beyond their households. Seminar programmes and workshops were designed and carried through by partnerships of adult education and social service practitioners; the methods used placed a strong emphasis on interaction and group dynamics as a facilitative context for effective learning; and the participants were encouraged to reflect critically on their own position as a socially vulnerable group, with a view to developing individual and collective strategies for improving the quality of their lives.

The emphasis placed on the active participation of the women themselves highlights an important pedagogic feature of this project as far as learning for active citizenship is concerned. Priority is given to encouraging learners to shape the teaching/learning processes themselves, and this represents the most important content of their learning altogether. Furthermore, the focus lies in learning to link together problems and solutions across different life spheres, i.e. across public, domestic and personal domains of experience. This project is also significant because it was directed explicitly at women’s needs and its ‘linking’ approach takes their family responsibilities into proper account. This holistic perspective is important, given the multiple and interrelated constraints which influence experience and opportunity for highly disadvantaged women: gender-specific discrimination, poor formal qualification levels, family poverty, high unemployment, and often minority/migrant group status. This case-study is another good example of the close links between social inclusion and access to active citizenship, but also of the significance of appropriate pedagogies for effective learning.

2.5 A musical and dance performance in Finland

Funded by Youth for Europe, this project brought together some 25 young people of different ethnic origins living in the Helsinki area to work together in 1996/7 on preparing an aesthetic and cultural product - a hip-hop musical - for the benefit of a wider group of young people, as well as providing, in itself, a learning experience for those directly involved. The project was co-ordinated by the municipality, but on the basis of co-management with the young people themselves. The involvement of professional youth workers who were able to contact and draw in young people from a wide range of ethnic communities was an important feature for the success of the initiative.

The focus of the project lay in promoting active citizenship at the local level to challenge racism, both by bringing young people from diverse backgrounds into a community of their own making (the performance group) and by bringing the theme of the multicultural society into their musical. Those involved in the project developed the idea of taking the show on tour to other parts of Europe after its première, and the process of planning for this encouraged the group to reflect on the cultural diversities they would meet up with in doing so. This is a simple but effective example of how a European dimension can be built on the foundation of work at local level. At the same time, the expressive activities of music and the arts particularly facilitate learning and exercising the social and communicative skills which are of paramount significance for the practice of active citizenship.

Participatory activities of this kind hold contribute to this learning process in at least three ways: as tools for transferring relevant information and skills, as an experiential learning method in which participants engage in the creation of inclusive practices, and, as a result, as part of an identity-forming process on a new and wider level of experience. In effect, such activities can become micro-fora for the practice of active citizenship. Participants experience some of its most important constitutive elements: open-minded discussion on issues of common concern, collective and democratic decisionmaking, shared activities based on those decisions, mutual observance of agreed rights and responsibilities, and the interdependence between individuals and communities at all levels of social life.

In this respect, the project-oriented structuring of the Community action programmes in education, training and youth makes perhaps a unique contribution, in that it positively invites the practice of inclusive and group-based activities. In this sense, learning for active citizenship may be an explicit aim which is pursued directly, but it may equally well be an implicit aim which is pursued much more indirectly across a variety of contexts and purposes. The potential for contributing to learning for active citizenship exists in much of what the action programmes fund; the challenge for the future is to use that potential to the full.