How research into citizenship education at university might enable transformative human rights education

ISSN 2535-5406 http://doi.org/10.7577/hrer.5120

Date received: 10-11-2022 Date accepted: 03-05-2023 Peer reviewed article

© 2023 the author(s). This is an OpenAccess publication licensed under terms given in:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (CC-BY 4.0). https://www.humanrer.org

Research articles

How research into citizenship

education at university might enable

transformative human rights education

Piers von Berg

University of Plymouth, UK, piersvonberg@gmail.com

Abstract

This article presents a new research design for pedagogical research at university. The design

demonstrates how personal and cultural citizenship education can be a form of transformative

human rights education by nurturing citizens who challenge patterns of exclusion. It draws on

shared traditions of citizenship and human rights education that have focused on lived

experiences of injustice and uses spaces that mitigate prevailing power structures. These ideas

have shaped a new pedagogical action research design that uses theories and practices of

transformational learning, authentic reflection, and participatory theatre to stimulate

‘becomings’ in civic identity and agency. ‘Becoming’ is a form of dialogical knowledge arising

from profound moments of empathy and solidarity. In these moments participants recognise

the human dignity of excluded others and share experiences of injustice, which expands their

sense of community and agency. The research design is a potential alternative to more

market-driven global citizenship education at university.

Keywords

Civic identity and agency, higher education, pedagogical research, personal and cultural

citizenship education, transformative human rights education

http://doi.org/10.7577/hrer.5120
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
https://www.humanrer.org/

Human Rights Education Review

Higher education at a crossroads

Adopting transformative education for human rights is one of the ways in which higher

education can respond to rapid social and planetary change (International Commission on the

Futures of Education, 2021). The International Commission has challenged universities to

prioritise pedagogies that promote core values of ‘respect, empathy, equality and solidarity’

(International Commission on the Futures of Education, p. 59). Personal and cultural forms of

citizenship education (Osler and Starkey, 2005) that focus on transforming civic identities

through empathy, compassion and solidarity can contribute to this agenda. This is one way in

which the practices of education for citizenship and human rights are symbiotic;

understanding of the one complements realisation of the other (Jerome, 2018).

Whilst there is good evidence that the learning of civic norms and values at university can

support respect for the rights of others, there is comparatively little examination of how

academics can research and design pedagogical interventions to achieve these outcomes

(Sloam et al., 2021, p. 23). Where universities run global citizenship education programmes,

civic values are diluted by an emphasis on skills for employability (Hammond & Keating, 2017)

and this leads to a disconnect with students’ everyday lived experience (Sen, 2021). This

predominance of neoliberal power structures in higher education was not addressed in the

International Commission’s report (Elfert & Morris, 2022). This problem was evident in my

own practice. Despite being taught human rights law, students wished for time and space

away from performative pressures to explore each other’s civic beliefs and practices (von

Berg, 2019; see similar findings in other social science disciplines – Muddiman, 2020).

Therefore, this study was devised to test how certain pedagogical research methods could

stimulate learning of civic identities and agencies that respect rights, whilst being sensitive to

university students’ concerns and interests. It draws on two specific shared approaches to

citizenship and human rights education: i) looking at the students’ lived experience, especially

injustices in their own communities, (Biesta & Lawy, 2006; Lundy & Martinez Sainz, 2018); ii)

distancing research participants from formal pressures in liminal (Swerts, 2017) or ‘third’

spaces (Blanchard & Nix 2019, p. 73). These approaches were incorporated into a novel action

research design that used transformative pedagogical practices as research methods to

stimulate reflexivity on how students see themselves in relation to others. These practices

encompassed authentic and critical reflection on civic identity and agency, transformational

learning through critical incidents, and Forum and Image Theatre (explained in detail under

‘Pedagogical practices and methods’ in the section on research design below). This is proposed

as a new transformative research design for ‘pedagogical research’ (Starkey et al., 2014)

where a teacher-researcher enables young participants to explore what matters to them in an

ethically transparent and participatory way. It is novel because these methods are combined

in order to complement each other.

P. von Berg

This type of intervention is particularly needed in higher education sectors such as that of the

U.K., which prioritise the student as a consumer and worker (Della Porta, 2020) rather than

viewing him/her as ‘an interdependent, caring and other-centred human being’ (Lynch et al.,

2007, p. 2).

The paper first explains the conceptual framework and relevant literature. It then describes

the research design at length, before turning to findings and conclusions.

How young people see themselves as citizens and how this can be transformed
at university

In order to understand transformations in students’ norms, beliefs and practices, a conceptual

framework of civic identity and agency is considered first. This is justified in normative terms

by a sociological theory of human rights and citizenship. This framework is examined against

the empirical research to generate the research questions.

Citizenship education and human rights education complement one another by nurturing

democratic societies, either through cultivating citizens who exercise their rights and

responsibilities or through the promotion and protection of human rights (Keet and Zembylas,

2018). Separate strands from citizenship education and human rights have underpinned this

study. These are, firstly, the importance of young people having space to explore their own

everyday understandings of citizenship (Biesta and Lawy, 2006) and, secondly, the

acknowledgement of the human dignity of the other as a way to expand the moral community

of rights-holders (Turner, 1993). Citizenship is, descriptively, membership of a political

community. Normatively, citizenship refers to attributes that help sustain a particular version

of a political community (Kymlicka, 2002). Scholars of civic identity have identified personal

and collective elements of personal reflection and civic engagement (Viola, 2020; Youniss et

al., 1997). This understanding is twofold: firstly, beliefs, values and norms concerning

citizenship as civic identity; secondly, the ability and self-belief to act to further these as a

citizen as civic agency. The cultivation of agency is fundamental to citizenship and human

rights education (Jerome, 2018; McCowan, 2009). Agency involves the setting of goals based

on values drawn from a personal identity that invests activities with meaning (Archer, 2000;

Bandura, 2001; Osler & Starkey, 2005). A challenge in using the concept of identity is that

individuals are not always capable of understanding and representing themselves, and so

interpretation of the data must account for this.

The beliefs, values and norms of civic identity are constructed by the individual through the

process of reflection and the drawing out of meaning from social experience (Haste, 2004).

Constructivists understand values as the ‘lens through which individuals filter and process

information and experience’ that carry ‘explanations for events, narratives, norms, and

Human Rights Education Review

prescriptions’ (Haste, 2010, p. 163). Norms are understood as social rules supported by either

empirical or normative expectations of how others will act (Bicchieri, 2006). It is suggested

that the values and norms of citizenship are those that explain how one should act as a

member of a political community towards others. This is based on Turner’s (1993) sociological

theory of human rights and citizenship, which argues that moral communities that respect

human rights are created through collective empathy and compassion for the plight of others.

This is achieved through respect for human dignity, whose core idea is that all human beings

have intrinsic value (Barrett, 2022).

This normative and theoretical position is justified by the social, political, and economic

context of modern Britain. Civic identity and agency in the UK is moving towards greater

individualised practices of citizenship (Henn & Foard, 2014) and a far greater diversity in social

mores and identities (Sobolewska & Ford, 2020). This is accompanied by officially sanctioned

hostility towards immigrants and refugees or ‘bordering’ (Yuval Davis et al., 2018), against a

background of persistent relative poverty (Cribb et al., 2021, p. 87). Such rapid movement

towards greater intolerance and inequality is pertinent to my research site, and community

tensions caused by this injustice should be addressed by citizenship and human rights

education.

As far as the evidence base is concerned, it mainly consists of young people, as they form the

majority of the undergraduate population (OECD, 2018, p. 426). Young people’s civic norms

and values are learned in their early years, from family and peers (Quintelier, 2015) and

through schools and extracurricular activities (Keating et al., 2011). Studies of young British

people’s civic identities show that they reflect a range of beliefs, values, and understandings

that are not necessarily consistent or coherent (Hylton et al., 2018). This is because civic

identity comprises both an understanding of one’s place within the community and prospects

for action (Viola, 2020), understood here as civic identity and civic agency which are

‘contingent and continually negotiated… [and] reshaped in response to practice and

experience’ (Smith et al., 2005, p. 440). My own law students synthesised hybrid civic

identities. These were comprised of norms of equal treatment of others, influenced by close

friendships at university, and employment-oriented values influenced by the institution (von

Berg, 2019). We know little about how this dynamic process can be affected by an educational

programme in one of today’s UK universities.

There is an emerging literature on education at university for human rights and citizenship.

Largely, human rights education provides more radical alternatives (Blanchard & Nix, 2019)

than global citizenship education (Fanghanel & Cousin, 2012; Hammond & Keating, 2017; Sen,

2021). Little research has been done on citizenship education at university (McCowan, 2012).

Universities’ efforts to teach global citizenship have been criticised for overlooking students’

P. von Berg

everyday experiences (Sen, 2021) and being overly influenced by employability (Hammond &

Keating, 2017). Consequently, I chose not to use global citizenship education in order to

encourage students to engage with the everyday spaces where they experienced and lived

citizenship or their citizenship-as-practice (Biesta and Lawy, 2006), and I acknowledge other

more critical approaches to global citizenship e.g., Andreotti (2006). There is a need for studies

of how citizenship education can enable students to critically address the culture in which they

live, rather than be co-opted by it. Radical pedagogy for human rights at university provides a

better route for transformative learning by engaging with injustice in students’ own lives and

seeking more ethical relationships with the marginalised (Blanchard & Nix 2019, p. 66-67).

Citizenship education shares core commitments with human rights education; to develop an

informed critical understanding of the world, to treat young people as active learners, and to

empower them to make positive change (Jerome, 2018). This study draws on personal and

cultural citizenship education (Osler & Starkey, 2005), and acknowledges that cultivating

knowledge and competences should form part of any larger intervention. The transformative

tradition seeks to shape students’ own personal beliefs and potential for action (Banks, 1995;

O’Sullivan et al., 2002). Transformative learning is rooted in profound changes in one’s

‘thoughts, feelings and actions’ (O’Sullivan et al., 2002, p. xvii), and this leads to the active

participation of students ‘to make their classrooms, schools, and communities more

democratic and just’ (Banks 1995, p. 20). In essence, the transformation of the learner

predicates transformative action. This occurs in a dynamic process where there is ‘greater

understanding, appreciation, empathy, and capacity for critique on the part of students’ of

injustice in their immediate communities (Boland, 2011, p. 105).

In sum, a conceptual framework of civic identity and agency, premised on a normative

justification of respecting human rights of different others, can help us to understand any

transformations in students’ reflexive understandings of their relations with others. This leads

to research questions about how student experiences within such an intervention might affect

their civic identities and agency, and whether this has any impact on how they construe their

relations with others.

A research design for transformative pedagogical research in higher education

Research design and ethics

This section explains the research design and methods/practices in considerable detail, as it is

the key contribution of the study. The design aimed to provide transformational experiences

as both a research exercise and a teaching activity, known as ‘pedagogical research’:

Pedagogical research creates spaces that facilitate the expression by young people of

their views and experiences. [It] aims to provide authentic learning experiences as

Human Rights Education Review

well as to provide data to inform policy and practice. (Starkey et al., 2014, p. 428)

The teacher-researcher is communicating participants’ experiences whilst simultaneously

facilitating those experiences. This research design fits the conceptual framework because it

allows participants to tell their own stories about citizenship and rights and explore new

iterations of them.

Transparency is vital in using a ‘rights-based epistemology of pedagogical research’ to allow

for reflexivity and provide a basis for an ethical and democratic form of research (Starkey et

al., 2014, p. 429). Transparency means reflecting on and communicating the teacher-

researcher’s own civic identity and civic agency as a teacher-researcher. In the information

form I stated my belief that citizenship education should be taught at university and the

participants’ thoughts and criticism on this was welcomed (and received). Participants were

informed at the outset that the teacher-researcher derived meaning from helping others,

especially those less able to help themselves. This might imply an ability to help others by

virtue of a superior position derived from oppressive structures (Jefferess, 2008, p. 28).

However, the purpose here was for participants to understand how they viewed others and

whether they recognised them as rights-holders (see findings below). The wider purpose of

the research, to consider whether citizenship education was needed or viable at the

university, was explained to participants. Students were also informed about the

dissemination of their data, which was anonymised, kept confidential and provided on the

basis of voluntary, informed consent. Participants could refuse to participate and/or withdraw

their data at any time (this was explained at the start and repeated later).

In learning for democracy, and in working with young people, one must try to base the power

relationship on mutual trust, dialogue and allowing participants a voice in the research

processes (Starkey et al., 2014, p. 427). The research design was informed by the students’

wish to explore their civic identities away from performative pressures. This led to using a

space decoupled from their studies, similar to the ‘third space’ that Blanchard and Nix (2019)

find helpful for human rights education at university. Also used were spaces at the edges of

the community in charities that support the vulnerable, areas which Swerts (2017) describes

as ‘liminal spaces’, essential for nurturing citizenship when it is marginalised by power

structures. These settings provided opportunities to reflect critically on the prevailing cultural

norms of employability and individualism in the university, and diversity and exclusion in the

wider civic society. Consequently, I also emphasised to the students that this was not a class,

and their contributions and attendance had no bearing on how I related to them if they

happened to be in one of my modules (most were not).

The emphasis on critical interaction led to the use of ideas of authentic and critical reflection

P. von Berg

(Freire, 1970), transformational learning (Mezirow, 1990), and Image and Forum Theatre

(Boal, 2002). Respectively, these approaches were intended to help students to question

assumptions behind beliefs, encounter new experiences outside of university, and rehearse

and critique behaviour (see below). These were organised as follows: authentic reflection

exercises in small groups (Stage 1); experiential learning with marginalised groups in the

surrounding city (Stage 2); and experimenting with social problems in Forum Theatre (Stage

3) – see below.

Figure 1

Combining authentic reflection (1), transformational learning (2), and Forum Theatre (3).

In Stage 1, discussion in small groups drew out the students’ civic identities and the familial

and peer contexts in which these had been formed; this was supported by Image Theatre

exercises to build trust. In Stage 2, the students volunteered in one of three charity

organisations that they chose themselves (see below). Here they experienced critical incidents

which stimulated authentic reflection and questions about their assumptions about others. In

Stage 3, the students collectively identified issues of concern in their everyday lives and

designed a Forum Theatre play to problematise them and engage with them agentically. The

data comprised of my observations written up immediately after each session to record events

and reflect on them, anonymous feedback, participants’ responses in focus groups, semi-

structured interviews, and a reporting-back session on the key findings. Therefore, my data

consisted of not only how participants saw the questions at the start and at the end, but also

how they responded during the process and reflected on the findings in the report-back

session several months later. In the interviews, participants were asked about their personal

and educational background, how they found their experiences of the workshops, and what,

Human Rights Education Review

if anything, they thought they had learned from the various activities, with a focus on how

they saw themselves as citizens and acted as citizens. The focus groups initially reflected on

the activities as a whole, then looked at how they saw themselves as citizens and acted as

citizens before, during and after the research activities.

This research design suggests a new form of pedagogical research because it combines

theories drawn from reflective practice, experiential learning, and participatory theatre in

liminal and third spaces to examine any effects on civic identity and agency. Participants and

researcher co-constructed the data in creating new stories around civic identities and

experimented with behaviours rather than simply unlocking pre-existing ideas (Starkey et al.,

2014).

Pedagogical practices and methods: critical incidents, authentic reflection and

Forum Theatre

Transformational learning theory is about individual personal change through the

construction of new meanings (Mezirow, 1990, 2009; Taylor, 2009). The theory has been

modified to take account of criticisms by those more closely aligned with Friere (1970), whose

work gives a better account of power structures.

Mezirow posits the need for a disorienting dilemma or critical incident that leads to a critical

re-examination of the normative assumptions underpinning beliefs. Later iterations (Taylor,

2009) argue that dialogue is used not as an analytical tool, or for debate, but as personal self-

disclosure in trustful communication with others. Dialogue helps form bonds by validating

personal experience when individuals find ‘they are not alone’ (Baumgartner, 2002, p. 55-56).

This leads to a greater sense of control and belonging, increasing the potential for building

solidarity through empathy.

Mezirow’s view that objective, informed and rational standards are implicit in human

communication underestimates the need to create a safe and trusting space to help students

cope with the emotions engaged by dialogue around the edges of understanding and

experience (Taylor, 2009). This has led to combining transformational learning exercises with

playful Image Theatre activities, in a space free from any educational assessment. Secondly,

transformational learning also lacks an appreciation of how structural inequalities may affect

conditions for learning (Collard and Law, 1989). Freire’s concept of authentic reflection is used,

which considers people ‘in their relations with the world’ where they ‘develop their power to

perceive critically the way they exist in the world with which and in which they find

themselves’ (Freire, 1970, p. 81-83). Authentic reflection was employed after the students’

experiences in the charities because encountering diverse persons can help to re-examine

values and assumptions.

P. von Berg

Mezirow and Freire have much to say on the roles of teachers and learners (see McCowan,

2009). What I draw from their theoretical models is the importance of criticality (through

critical reflection) and conscientisation (through authentic reflection) as a basis for

emancipatory action or praxis (the dialectic of reflection and action). Students and academics

can co-construct this together as ‘teacher-students’ and ‘student-teachers’ (Freire, 1970, p.

80), thus developing the ‘teacher-researcher’ concept of pedagogical research (Starkey et al.,

2014).

These ideas of transformational learning and authentic reflection were combined with

participatory theatre so that learners could experiment with forms of agency against shared

senses of injustice. The forms of participatory theatre used were Forum Theatre and Image

Theatre. They are part of a larger tradition called the Theatre of the Oppressed, a form of

participatory theatre created by Augusto Boal. Influenced by Freire, Boal believed that theatre

could emancipate through dialogue and learning because the critical consciousness of actors

and audience is provoked by interacting with stories close to real life (Strawbridge, 2000).

Image Theatre is a collection of group exercises for individuals to use their bodies to express

different images of problems in society, as well as to become accustomed to acting (Boal,

2002). The images portrayed are of emotions, experiences, lives, and oppression. The process

of thinking with one’s body is intended to bypass social norms and inhibitions. Forum Theatre

is a form of theatrical game where a problem from the actors’ lived experience is presented

to the audience, who are invited to propose and enact solutions (Boal, 1998, 2002). The

problem is a form of oppression with an identifiable oppressor and victim (the protagonist).

The audience or ‘spect-actors’ are invited to intervene by assuming the role of the protagonist

if they think they can address the oppression, whilst the remaining cast stay in character and

resist any change. The result is an experimentation with different possible solutions to a social

issue that both actors and audience have experienced, or can identify with. Image Theatre

exercises help the cast devise their own script and rehearse. Both during and after the play

there is a facilitator or ‘joker’ (myself as teacher-student-researcher in this study) who helps

the audience, and later the players, discuss what they have learned from the experience and

come to terms with any powerful emotions. Forum Theatre can stimulate reflexivity because

theatre allows us ‘to observe ourselves in action’ (Boal, 1998, p. 7). It cultivates agency in a

transformational sense because participants come to ‘see the social world as one that can be

changed [through]… multiple, sometimes small, sometimes decisive, individual or collective

acts’ (Erel et al., 2017, p. 310). In this process a greater assertiveness can arise from a sense

of solidarity among participants that they are ‘not alone’ in their experiences (Erel et al., p.

305), a similar development to the one we see in transformational learning studies

(Baumgartner, 2002).

In Forum Theatre, moments of transformation can be limited to the research space.

Human Rights Education Review

Transformations in participants’ identities and agency engendered by Forum and Image

Theatre are understood by using Kaptani and Yuval-Davis’ (2008) idea of ‘becomings’, a form

of dialogical knowledge (this is applied to the findings in the ‘Discussion’ section below). This

knowledge is found in the narratives and performances in the collective space, which contain

contributions from participants and researcher that affect and are affected by each other.

In summary, transformations in identity and agency can occur through challenging students

with critical incidents that can be deconstructed afterwards using critical and authentic

reflection, which can become reflexive in Forum Theatre and Image Theatre exercises. This

develops the concept of pedagogical research (Starkey et al., 2014) in a university context led

by a teacher-student-researcher. As a form of personal citizenship education, it contributes to

human rights education because it helps students to confront injustice, practice empathy with

others, and discover solidarity.

Participant profile and recruitment

The eleven first-year students came from law, criminology, international relations, politics and

sociology. There were eight females and three males; eight of them were White British. All

were aged between 18-20, except for one mature student, and mostly non-religious, except

for three Christians and one Muslim. They were heterosexual, with no declared disabilities,

and their parents’ occupations were a split of lower and middle-class ones. Data analysis

below refers to how these backgrounds may have coloured the students’ experiences.

Data analysis

The focus of the analysis was on how the students made sense of their experience in the

educational intervention. Their prior experiences were taken into account. I was mindful that

participants might struggle to make meaning of new experiences. Thematic analysis was

employed (Braun and Clarke, 2006; Smith et al., 2012). Immersion in the data (through

transcribing and repeated listening) led to categorising it as a series of codes, sub-themes and

themes that had significance for the research question.

Exploring the data on the students’ experiences

The strongest over-arching transformation was how the students began to challenge existing

assumptions and tensions in their beliefs, norms and values concerning marginalised

individuals in their community. They also began to form social bonds and resources for

collective agency with other participants in Forum Theatre. The students are referred to by

their chosen pseudonyms in the data, which comes from focus groups transcripts, interviews

and observational notes.

P. von Berg

A felt sense of citizenship and critical reflection on their communities

When the students returned from their experiences in the charities I observed that ‘[t]he

students had something to say. I could see in their eyes that they were interested in what had

happened’. Many of them commented on powerful and immediate experiences of meeting

refugees, the homeless, and those in financial hardship:

I think that was the most shocking part of, or like the most memorable part of the

experience I guess because it was … a very personal thing to like go in someone’s

house…it was quite bare, and like there wasn’t beds… they had mattresses on the

floor and nothing else, and I found that quite upsetting almost. (Emma)

Emma described vivid experiences that affected her emotionally. She has stepped into

someone else’s private space. Emma was from a small town where she had not encountered

a refugee before. She said refugees were ‘something you see on the news… you kind of detach

yourself from it. I was like oh there is a person sat right in front of me and …that was kind of

really oh my god for me’. In contrast, May, who lived in Plymouth, and visited the debt clinic,

confessed that she had seen ‘homeless people, or people with drug problems or mental health

issues’, but ‘then the person was sat in front of me with the back of their chair to me… So, that

was again, not surprising but shocking… Kind of like up close and actually talking to them...’

There is an immediacy to these experiences conveyed in strong language, an immediacy that

comes from face-to-face conversation and seeing inside a private home. Both students had

seen individuals up-close who were previously at a distance, on the news or in the street.

These individuals had been othered, and so excluded as marginal and less equal (Powell &

Menindian, 2016).

The students’ understanding of their experiences gave the individuals they met personality,

stories, and humanity. As Emma memorably put it: ‘... were human, they were normal people,

chatty, friendly, laughed’. The phrase ‘normal people’ suggested a person searching for an

appropriate term to describe a human being who was no longer excluded as a different other.

These were not simply the reactions of young people with little experience of the world. Alex,

a mature student who had worked for many years in a high street bank, reflected:

… you sometimes forget about the actual people behind the situations… So actually

you think more about the people, does that makes sense? It is not just a homeless

person anymore. You actually have a background to this person, and this makes this

person come alive more. (Alex)

Here Alex compared her experience with that of other students in the focus group – an

example of how reflection and discussion after the event helped students process their

experiences. Like Emma and May, she moved from being a citizen-as-a-witness, passive and

Human Rights Education Review

distant, whose experience is mediated through norms and prevailing stereotypes, to direct

interaction. This disrupts her lens, and stimulates reflection, learning, and empathy. These

critical incidents provided a basis for transformation (Merizow, 2009) by giving personality,

and dignity to people, and a basis for rights for those excluded as ‘refugees’ or ‘the homeless’.

They revised empirical and normative expectations and this led to new perspectives (Biccheri,

2006; Haste, 2010).

In each case, the younger participants referred back to parental influences as a reference point

that was overturned. Charlie had a negative experience in her charity when she saw people

verbally abusing each other:

[T]o see that people can still treat each other with such animosity [in the homeless

shelter], and judge each other even at that low point, I think will stick for me for a

very long time. (Charlie)

This was a strong experience for Charlie because it went against what she had ‘always been

told [by her parents]’. Interestingly, Charlie had volunteered in homeless shelters before, and

studied citizenship, but nevertheless learned something new in a profound way – a lasting

impression of something that went against her prior beliefs. Emma was the most striking

example of a student who explicitly altered her parental perceptions. She said she had been

told by her father that refugees were ‘taking all our jobs’ but she said ‘most of them that I saw

were struggling to actually find jobs… that was something that has definitely altered my

perspective on it, I guess’. This is clear evidence of movement of an empirical and normative

expectation, movement emerging from ‘becomings’ or dialogical knowledge generated in the

research space.

Alex found the experience of the debt clinic challenged her prior beliefs about persons in

financial hardship. In her role as a financial advisor at a bank she would simply ‘shoo them out

of the door’, as the bank could not help them. Now she critically reflected on this, asking ‘who

picks it up and where does it go? And should it end there? Should they do more?’ She

questioned her assumption that she was not able to help individuals. From a very different

position, Yaya, from Indonesia, explained how she had come to believe from the media that

all refugees were Muslims. Now she had found out that ‘most of them are Christian and a lot

of [them] come from like another religion. I am a bit surprised… I have to be like you know

more open-minded to, I have to tell my friend’. These two students from very different

backgrounds in terms of age, social class, nationality, and religion, questioned their empirical

expectations, and in doing so, decided on courses of action.

The participants’ experiences suggested that they humanised individuals. This was a term

several students, in separate focus groups, used in their anonymous feedback. The students’

P. von Berg

empirical and normative expectations about marginalised and othered individuals were

challenged and, in some cases, possibly altered (e.g., Emma). This was a limited interaction

that lacked voice from those encountered (except as reported by the students), but it is

notable how students from very different backgrounds questioned their norms and values.

They had empathy into social exclusion and discrimination and how it felt to not be a citizen

– ‘they feel alone’ (Jerry). This affected the perspective they used to filter and process

information, or their values (Haste, 2010). In seeing marginalised individuals as human beings

in need of compassionate social interaction they acknowledged a need for different treatment

and discussion with others to undo exclusionary barriers. This leads to a recognition that

others are rights holders; they are entitled to humane treatment because they have dignity.

Solidarity and collective senses of agency in Forum Theatre

The participants formed three groups: mental health (Alex, Charlie, May, Yaya and Fransisco

– who acted as a leader with May); pollution (Bella, Archie and Rosie); and discrimination

(Emma, Jerry and Julie). The mental health group was the most cohesive and was able to move

from a script to a performance. This was arguably because they retained the links between

their personal university experience, what they witnessed in the charities, and the script

(according to Emma, who struggled in her group but admired the efforts of the mental health

one). In the other groups, students did not create a script, either because group members

missed a session or because they struggled to find a way to work with their chosen problem.

All groups drew a series of structural knock-on factors on flip-chart papers that showed

authentic reflections on how their chosen forms of oppression occurred. This meant that these

predominantly young groups did not individualise the oppression or focus myopically on

student experience (Erel et al., 2017). This suggests the benefit of combining experiential

learning with Forum Theatre.

The mental health group performed a memorable play. The protagonist, a student called

Delilah, struggled to fit in at university and eventually developed mental health problems,

resulting in her losing her accommodation and begging on the street. In each scene, her

parents, peers, and student support staff were too busy to listen attentively to her, talked

over her, or ignored her. As an academic, I could relate my own experience of a pressurised

work environment to this depiction of isolation in a fast-moving world where peers and

proximal others appear too preoccupied or indifferent. One student emphatically agreed:

‘they were just like almost re-enacting just what I, what you see, I guess, sometimes around

uni and stuff’. After around four hours of preparation and little training in theatre, each

performer knew their role and spoke their lines without a script. Encouraging students to

express their everyday experience through co-creation, a shared tradition in citizenship and

human rights education, helped participants find meaning in activities and understand how

rights come to be undermined.

Human Rights Education Review

For the performers, there was a sense of catharsis in airing an issue that was hidden and

thought to be experienced solely by that individual. May, who played the parent and guidance

counsellor, said:

… it was a bit of a relief to get the loneliness aspect kind of heard… Rather than

internalising it all the time. Like sharing it with everyone else. And they all get it as

well… And it’s not just you… It brought us closer together, I think.

In a separate debriefing, others repeated this impression. Bella, who was in the audience,

explained what she got out of the play:

More awareness… of the subject that we were on about. Because it is the same

thing. Like you always just think ‘oh it’s just me’. (Bella)

This data could be significant. This form of words ‘oh, it’s just me’ – as if it is not – (Bella) and

‘it’s not just you’ (May), has appeared in two other separate studies of transformational

learning and Forum Theatre, with different participants in different contexts (Baumgartner,

2002, pp. 55-56; Erel et al., 2017, p. 305). The realisation that one is not alone in one’s

experience is a powerful resource for building social bonds and solidarity. It was unsurprising

that first year students, who had been at university for about six months, were still trying to

fit in and adjust. However, several participants from different disciplines – Bella, May, Archie

and Fransisco – talked of friendships with other students and involvement in clubs. Arguably,

this data suggests that forms of alienation, exclusion and consequent distress are strongly felt.

As a practice, Forum Theatre allows individuals to interpret their moment in time, how they

fit into their social context, and share their understanding in a way that forms solidarity, a key

component of transformative human rights education.

The experience of acting in Image Theatre and Forum Theatre and going into charities in the

community were steps into the unknown for the students and myself, the teacher-student-

researcher. There was a pronounced power imbalance and inequality between the students

and the users of the charities. I tried to address this risk by encouraging students to listen to

the stories of others and to play the roles of others in Forum Theatre. It was unsettling and

everyone at certain points seemed nervous of performing (even myself as a facilitator),

meeting strangers, and not knowing what would happen. Alex, who had had positions of

responsibility in society (mortgage advisor), talked of not being ‘so afraid’ of how one can

‘invent all these barriers and you might be a bit apprehensive about doing something’. After

one session, my observation was: ‘We are all learning together. This is the first time I have run

Forum Theatre [with students] … It was an unknown quantity’. As a teacher-student-

researcher, trying new things in the classroom, one was learning possibilities for agency as a

citizenship and human rights educator that improved students’ understanding of human rights

P. von Berg

issues without directly teaching law. It was discomforting that I could not step in as a lecturer

with expert knowledge, because the ideas were drawn from participants’ experiences.

In summary, the central findings are that the responses indicated ‘becomings’ in civic identity.

Such ‘becomings’ were manifested in terms of new dialogical knowledge shaping norms and

values applied to marginalised members of the community and senses of agency from shared

experiences of isolation and exclusion. As a teacher-student-researcher, I shared the students’

discomfort as we tried something new in co-creating new stories and encountering strangers

(Zembylas, 2015). Let us now consider the answers to the research question and develop the

conceptual framework.

Discussion

In answer to the research question, the civic identities and agency of the undergraduate

participants were shaped by these students humanising those at the edges of their

community, building social bonds with diverse others, and critically reflecting on oppression

in the university and the community. The most striking form of oppression took the form of

the exclusion or misrepresentation of others. These experiences arose among a diverse group

of social science students in community-based experiential learning with participatory

theatre. This process was supported by moments for authentic and critical reflection. There

were limitations in that participants self-selected, and this was a small sample. Responses

could vary with a larger sample because transformational experiences are partly predicated

on students’ perceptions of the activity rather than the nature of the activity itself (Ashwin et

al., 2016). Poignant pieces of data (‘it’s not just me’) emerged, as they have in other

transformational learning and Forum Theatre studies, but here the participants identified a

form of oppression in their own lives that had parallels in the community, showing perhaps

the value of using critical incidents to inform Forum Theatre.

The form of knowledge produced in this transformative pedagogical research will be analysed

using the conceptual lenses of civic identity and agency along with the idea of ‘becomings’

(Kaptani & Yuval-Davis, 2008). The term ‘becomings’ represents a relational and dialogic form

of knowledge generated by this research design. The incipient transformations emerged from

conversational interactions: ‘public engagement cannot just be about humans talking to one

another, rather their iterations are inextricably linked to provoking one another to become

this or that’ (Waghid, 2021, p. 3). ‘Becomings’ are also affective and experiential knowledge.

Citizenship was identified as a felt experience, particularly when others were humanised

through compassion and empathy. This speaks to the aim of transformative human rights

education to foster ‘a shared language and an entry point into a moral universe committed to

the recognition and thriving of all’ (International Commission on Futures of Education, 2021,

Human Rights Education Review

p. 73).

This research design provides lessons and challenges for practitioners. First, student input

helped. Their wish to explore each other’s civic identities led to the formation of new social

bonds that accounted for the high level of engagement (according to their feedback).

Secondly, the practices and methods worked better in combination: experiential learning in

the community offset the tendency for young people in Forum Theatre to individualise

oppression because they had no knowledge of unjust social structures. This helped embed

knowledge of power relations and social structures in Forum Theatre practice, a problem

highlighted by researchers with young participants (Erel et al., 2017). The activity was

challenging, in that time pressures constrained how long it could run and it was an

uncomfortable change to students’ and lecturer’s normal modes of interaction. This could

deter other academics and students from taking part (Smith et al., 2008). Also, it was

incomplete. It focused mainly on the ‘becomings’ of the students and their potential for

transformative action and did not facilitate action against the injustices identified in the

university and the community. Consequently, there are further questions to address in future

cycles of action research: How can this intervention be expanded to support transformative

action? Might other students and staff engage? If so, how? And what will be the results?

Conclusions

Universities have a major, critical role in sustaining and creating the culture of citizenship

(Crick, 2000, p. 145) and this entails respect for human rights. In the UK, this culture is under

strain from an intolerance of differences and an increasing inequality which leads to the

exclusion of others (Yuval Davis et al., p. 2018). These forms of injustice are perpetuated

within universities. Research into pedagogy on citizenship and human rights at university

demonstrates a need to use pedagogies that can respond to students’ concerns about

injustice and distance them from institutional pressures (Blanchard & Nix, 2019; Hammond &

Keating, 2017; Sen, 2021). This study contributes to this agenda by providing a detailed

research design for pedagogical research into how some of the goals of transformative human

rights education most relevant to this political context, such as nurturing citizens with

empathy for different others and solidarity with peers against injustice, can be realised using

personal and cultural citizenship education. This can be achieved by developing Starkey et al.’s

(2014) concept of pedagogical research in higher education, whereby academic citizens

consult with students about their concerns and provide pedagogical interventions to address

them.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Tristan McCowan and Hugh Starkey for their advice and support, and,

P. von Berg

Alex Cahill, Eva Harðardóttir, Kerim Sen and Maria Vamvalis for their helpful comments. I am

grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback. My thanks especially to

the participants for giving up their time and for their insights.

References

Andreotti, V. (2006). Soft versus critical global citizenship education. Policy & Practice - A

Development Education Review, 3, 40-51.

Ashwin, P., Abbas, A., & McLean, M. (2016). Conceptualising transformative undergraduate

experiences: a phenomenographic exploration of students’ personal projects. British

Educational Research Journal, 42(6), 962-977. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3244

Barrett, M. (2022). Dignity, Respect, Human Rights, Cultural Diversity and Intercultural

Relations. Intercultura, 105, 19-24.

Baumgartner, L. (2002). Living and learning with HIV/AIDS: Transformational tales continued.

Adult Education Quarterly, 53(1), 44-59. https://doi.org/10.1177/074171302237203

von Berg, P. (2019). Exploring the development of a hybrid and synthetic meaning of

citizenship at a British university law school. Critical Studies in Teaching and Learning,

7(2), 52-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.14426/cristal.v7i2.196

Bicchieri, C. (2006). The Grammar of Society: The Nature and Dynamics of Social Norms. New

York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511616037

Biesta, G., & Lawy, R. (2006). Citizenship-as-practice: the educational implications of an

inclusive and relational understanding of citizenship. British Journal of Educational

Studies, 54(1), 34-50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8527.2006.00335.x

Blanchard, L., & Nix, M. (2019). Creating spaces for radical pedagogy in higher education.

Human Rights Education Review, 2(2), 65-83. http://doi.org/10.7577/hrer.3363

Boal, A. (1998). Legislative Theatre. Using performance to make politics. Jackson, A. (trans).

Routledge: London and New York.

Boal, A. (2002). Games for Actors and Non-Actors. (2nd ed). Jackson, A. (trans). Routledge:

Abingdon.

Boland, J. (2011). Positioning Civic Engagement on the Higher Education Landscape: Insights

from a Civically Engaged Pedagogy. Tertiary Education and Management, 1(2), 101-

115. https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2011.562523

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in

Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3244
https://doi.org/10.1177/074171302237203
http://dx.doi.org/10.14426/cristal.v7i2.196
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511616037
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8527.2006.00335.x
http://doi.org/10.7577/hrer.3363
https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2011.562523
https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Human Rights Education Review

Collard, S., & Law, M. (1989). The limits of perspective transformation: A critique of

Mezirow's theory. Adult Education Quarterly, 39(2), 99-107.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0001848189039002004

Cribb, J., Waters, J, Wernham, T., & Xu, X. (2021). Living standards, poverty and inequality in

the UK: 2021. IFS Report R194. London: Institute for Fiscal Studies.

https://doi.org/10.1920/re.ifs.2022.0215

Della Porta, D., Cini, L., and Guzmán-Concha, G. (2020). Contesting Higher Education: Student

Movements against Neoliberal Universities. Bristol: Bristol University Press.

https://doi.org/10.46692/9781529208634

Elfert, M. & Morris, P. (2022). The Long Shadow Between the Vision and the Reality: A

Review of the UNESCO Report “Reimagining our Futures Together: A New Social

Contract for Education”. Quaderni di Pedagogia Della Scuola, 1(2), 37-44.

Erel, U., Reynolds, T., and Laptani, E. (2017). Participatory theatre for transformative social

research. Qualitative Research, 17(3), 302-312.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794117696029

Fanghanel, J., & Cousin, G. (2012). ‘Worldly’ pedagogy: a way of conceptualising teaching

towards global citizenship. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(1), 39-50.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2011.590973

Flanagan, C., & Levine, P. (2010). Civic Engagement and the Transition to Adulthood. The

Future of Children, 20(1), 159-179. https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.0.0043

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum International Publishing

Group.

Hammond, C., and Keating, A. (2017). Global citizens or global workers? Comparing

university programmes for global citizenship education in Japan and the UK. Compare:

A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 48(6), 914-934.

https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2017.1369393

Haste, H. (2004). ‘Constructing the citizen’. Political Psychology, 25(3), 413–439.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00378.x

Haste, H. (2010). Citizenship Education: A Critical Look at a Contested Field. In L. Sherrod, J.

Torney-Purta & C. Flanagan (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Civic Engagement in

Youth (pp. 161-188). Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons Inc.

https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470767603.ch7

Henn, M., & Foard, N. (2014). Social differentiation in young people's political participation:

the impact of social and educational factors on youth political engagement in Britain.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0001848189039002004
https://doi.org/10.1920/re.ifs.2022.0215
https://doi.org/10.46692/9781529208634
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794117696029
https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2011.590973
https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.0.0043
https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2017.1369393
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00378.x
https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470767603.ch7

P. von Berg

Journal of Youth Studies, 17(3), 360-380.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2013.830704

Hylton, P., Kisby, B., & Goddard, P. (2018). Young people’s citizen identities: a q-

methodological analysis of English youth perceptions of citizenship in Britain. Societies,

8(4), 121-142. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc8040121

International Commission on the Futures of Education (2021). Reimagining Our Futures

Together. A New Social Contract for Education. Paris: UNESCO.

Jerome, L. (2018). Hypocrites or heroes? Thinking about the role of the teacher in human

rights education. Human Rights Education Review, 1(2), 46-64.

https://doi.org/10.7577/hrer.2873

Jefferess, D. (2008). Global citizenship and the cultural politics of benevolence. Critical

Literacy: Theories and Practices, 2(1), 27–36.

Kaptani, E., & Yuval-Davis, N. (2008). Participatory Theatre as a Research Methodology:

Identity, Performance and Social Action Among Refugees. Sociological Research Online,

13(5), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.1789

Keating A., Benton T., & Kerr D. (2011). Tracing the trends and transitions in young people’s

citizenship practices: what are the implications for researching citizenship and

citizenship education? Educational Research, 53(2), 223–235.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2011.572371

Keet, A., & Zembylas, M. (2018). Introduction. In M. Zembylas & A. Keet (Eds.), Critical

Human Rights, Citizenship, and Democracy Education (pp. 1-16). London, New York,

Oxford, New Dehli, Sydney: Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-

27198-5

Kymlicka, W. (2002). Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction. (2nd ed). Oxford:

Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/hepl/9780198782742.003.0001

Lundy, L., & Martinez Sainz, G. (2018). The role of law and legal knowledge for a

transformative human rights education: addressing violations of children’s rights in

formal education. Human Rights Education Review, 1(2), 5-24.

https://doi.org/10.7577/hrer.2560

Lynch, K., Lyons, M., & Cantillon, S. (2007). Breaking silence: educating citizens for love, care

and solidarity. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 17(1-2), 1-19.

https://doi.org/10.1080/09620210701433589

McCowan, T. (2009). Rethinking Citizenship Education, A Curriculum for Participatory

Democracy. London and New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2013.830704
https://doi.org/10.3390/soc8040121
https://doi.org/10.7577/hrer.2873
https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.1789
https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2011.572371
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27198-5
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27198-5
https://doi.org/10.1093/hepl/9780198782742.003.0001
https://doi.org/10.7577/hrer.2560
https://doi.org/10.1080/09620210701433589

Human Rights Education Review

McCowan, T. (2012). Opening spaces for citizenship in higher education: three initiatives in

English universities. Studies in Higher Education, 37(1), 51-67.

https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.493934

Mezirow, J. (1990). Fostering Critical Reflection in Adulthood: a Guide to Transformative and

Emancipatory Learning. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Mezirow, J. (2009). Transformative learning theory. In E. Taylor & J. Mezirow (Eds.),

Transformative Learning in Practice. Insight from Community, Workplace and Higher

Education (pp. 18-32). San Francisco: John Wiley.

Muddiman, E. (2020). Degree subject and orientations to civic responsibility: a comparative

study of Business and Sociology students. Critical Studies in Education, 61(5), 577-593.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2018.1539020

Sen, A. (2021). Challenging or consolidating neoliberalism: prominent discursive traces on a

university-level citizenship course. Higher Education Research and Development, 49(3),

613-626. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1765319

Strawbridge, S. (2000). Some thoughts on connections between the political and the

therapeutic in the work of Fox and Boal. Dramatherapy, 22(2), 8-12.

https://doi.org/10.1080/02630672.2000.9689542

O’Sullivan, E., Morrell, A., & O’Connor, M. (2002). Expanding the Boundaries of

Transformative Learning. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-

1-349-63550-4

OECD. (2018). Education at a Glance 2018: OECD Indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing.

https://doi.org/10.1787/eag-2018-en

Osler, A., & Starkey, H. (2005). Changing Citizenship. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

powell, j.a. and Menendian, S. (2016). The problem of othering. Towards inclusiveness and

belonging. Othering and Belonging, 1, 14-41.

Quintelier, E. (2015). Engaging Adolescents in Politics: The Longitudinal Effect of Political

Socialization Agents. Youth & Society, 47(1), 51–69.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X13507295

Sloam, J., Kisby, B., Henn, M., & Oldfield, B. (2021). Voice, equality and education: the role of

higher education in defining the political participation of young Europeans.

Comparative European Politics, 19, 296-322. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-020-

00228-z

https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.493934
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2018.1539020
https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1765319
https://doi.org/10.1080/02630672.2000.9689542
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-63550-4
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-63550-4
https://doi.org/10.1787/eag-2018-en
https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X13507295
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-020-00228-z
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-020-00228-z

P. von Berg

Smith, G., Ottewill, R., Jubb, E., Sperling, E. & Wyman, M. (2008). Teaching citizenship in

higher education. European Political Science, 7, 135-143.

https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2008.8

Smith, J., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2012). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. London:

SAGE Publications Ltd.

Smith, N., Lister, R., Middleton, S., & Cox, L. (2005). Young People as Real Citizens: Towards

an Inclusionary Understanding of Citizenship. Journal of Youth Studies, 8(4), 425-443.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13676260500431743

Sobolewska, M., & Ford, R. (2020). Brexitland. Identity, diversity and the reshaping of British

politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108562485

Starkey, H., Akar, B., Jerome, L., & Osler, A. (2014). Power, Pedagogy and Participation:

ethics and pragmatics in research with young people. Research in Comparative and

International Education, 9(4), 426-440. https://doi.org/10.2304/rcie.2014.9.4.426

Swerts, T. (2017). Creating space for citizenship: the liminal politics of undocumented

activism. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 41(3), 379-395.

https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12480

Taylor, E.W. (2009). Fostering transformative learning. In E. Taylor and J. Mezirow (Eds.),

Transformative Learning in Practice. Insight from Community, Workplace and Higher

Education (pp. 3-17). San Francisco: John Wiley.

Turner, B. (1993). Outline of a theory of human rights. Sociology, 27(3), 489-512.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038593027003009

Viola, J. (2021). Young People's Civic Identity in the Digital Age. Cham: Palgrave MacMillan.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37405-1

Waghid, Y. (2021). Editorial: Citizenship education as forms of human engagement.

Citizenship. Teaching and Learning 16(1), 3-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1386/ctl_00043_2

Youniss, J., McLellan, J.A., & Yates, M. (1997). What we know about engendering civic

identity. American Behavioral Scientist, 40(5), 620-631.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764297040005008

Yuval-Davis, N., Wemyss, G., & Cassidy, K. (2018). Everyday bordering, belonging and the

reorientation of British immigration legislation. Sociology, 52(2), 228-244.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038517702599

https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2008.8
https://doi.org/10.1080/13676260500431743
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108562485
https://doi.org/10.2304/rcie.2014.9.4.426
https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12480
https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038593027003009
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37405-1
http://dx.doi.org/10.1386/ctl_00043_2
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764297040005008
https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038517702599

Human Rights Education Review

Zembylas, M. (2015). ‘Pedagogy of discomfort’ and its ethical implications: the tensions of

ethical violence in social justice education. Ethics and Education, 10(2), 163-174.

https://doi.org/10.1080/17449642.2015.1039274