Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 103 Perception of Ethiopian Students and Educators on the Responsibility for Good Citizenship Mulugeta Yayeh Worku Bahir Dar University, Ethiopia Abstract: The purpose of this study was to understand the perceptions of Ethiopian students and school practitioners as to whose responsibility it is to foster good citizenship. To achieve this purpose, a descriptive survey design was used. Through different sampling techniques, 42 Civic and Ethical Education teachers, 410 students, 157 non-Civic and Ethical Education teachers, and 29 school leaders were selected from 20 schools. A questionnaire was used to gather data concerning participants’ perceptions on the responsibility of the three major stakeholders of good citizenship: traditional institutions (the family, community, and religious institutions), educational institutions, and non- academic institutions (NGOs, mass media, and political parties). Results of the study revealed that the perceptions of Ethiopian students and educators regarding the responsibility for good citizenship were narrow and incomplete. It is also understood that there has been much reliance on schools and their Civic and Ethical Education teachers for the preparation of good citizens. In the article, the implications of these findings, both for policymaking and classroom practice, are indicated. Key words: citizenship education, Ethiopia, good citizenship, perception. Introduction Many scholars believe that education for good citizenship plays an important role in the process of preparing competent and responsible citizens. Westheimer and Kahne (2003), for example, contend that Citizenship Education has a paramount significance in preparing good citizens, citizens who are personally responsible, participative, and social justice-oriented individuals. Parker and Jarolimek (1997) also indicate that the teaching of Citizenship Education is decisive in preparing citizens who appreciate democracy and democratic living. For these scholars, failure mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 104 to educate children with the major ideas of democracy, through Citizenship Education, could lead to various undemocratic practices and mass sufferings. As Parker (2014, p. 17) showed, “democratic citizens are not born with the knowledge, skills, and characters they need” to possess. This is the major reason that necessitates public education in general and Citizenship Education in particular. Citizenship Educators unanimously contend that the building up of democratic systems and democratic citizenship is unthinkable without the proper teaching of Citizenship Education (Parker, 2014; Parker & Jarolimek, 1997; UNDP, 2004). Thus, good citizenship and Citizenship Education, with much emphasis on student empowerment with the necessary knowledge, skills, attitudes, and dispositions, has become the central mission of schooling in many countries. In Ethiopia, too, the issue of good citizenship has been given attention, particularly starting in the early 1990s. In fact, before the 1990s, there were some attempts to teach Citizenship Education through different school subjects. For instance, during the 1960s and early 1970s, Ethiopian schools had been teaching their students some citizenship values through a school subject called Moral Education. The purpose of this subject, according to some sources (e.g., Girma, 2006; MoE, 2007), was to shape the character of students in line with the Ethiopian Orthodox Christian faith and to instill obedience and a sense of subservience in the younger generation so that they would remain docile to the political, social, and economic order of the day. This nature of Moral Education prevailed in the country until the demise of the government of Haile Selassie I (1930- 1974). Likewise, during the military regime (1974-1991), a sort of Citizenship Education called Political Education was introduced to the Ethiopian school curriculum (Akalewold, 2005; Solomon, 2008). However, since that government was a socialist-affiliated military government, it had no place for the teaching of major citizenship values and democratic ideals. Its curriculum overemphasized the Marxist-Leninist ideology that the government was advocating (Akalewold, 2005). Due to this, Political Education of that period did not significantly contribute to making students understand and exercise their citizenship rights and responsibilities. Despite these “efforts” to teach Citizenship Education before the 1990s, some Ethiopian educators believe that the subjects taught prior to the 1990s could not be considered Citizenship Education. Meron (2006, p. 251), for instance, arrived at the following conclusion: “Both the imperial period's moral education and the Dergue's political education cannot be taken as Civic Education, for both of them did not fundamentally deal with the rights, freedoms, and duties of Ethiopian citizens.” mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 105 As stated earlier, the 1990s was a formative period for Citizenship Education in Ethiopia. This was due to some socio-political developments that took place in the country (Akalewold, 2005; Girma, 2006). For instance, in May 1991, after protracted guerrilla fighting, the present ruling party, the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), controlled political power by ousting the pro-socialist military government that ruled the country for 17 years. This political group then established a transitional government guided by the Transitional Period Charter.1 In 1994, the new government introduced its Education and Training Policy (ETP) (Solomon, 2008; TGE, 1994). Many analysts of the country’s education system consider this event as a milestone for the renewed interest in Citizenship Education in Ethiopia. In 2007, the Blueprint of Civic and Ethical Education2 (CEE), the policy document for Citizenship Education in Ethiopia, was introduced. In this policy document, the involvement of major CEE stakeholders, that is, the family, local community, religious institutions, schools, CEE teachers, non-CEE teachers, students, principals, supervisors, district education offices, various governmental institutions, the mass media, non-governmental organizations, and others, is recognized to be decisive in materializing the notion of good citizenship (MoE, 2007). Though much attention has been given to CEE in Ethiopia, the desire for good citizenship has not been successful. Some local studies conducted on the implementation of CEE reported that the subject has been in a process of implementation without the meaningful support of individuals and institutions that were responsible for good citizenship (MoE, 2007; Mulugeta, 2011; Mulugeta, Animaw, Desalegn, & Belay, 2011). Due to this, the need to have good citizens who can play important roles in alleviating national and global problems seems unsuccessful. Some studies (e.g., MoE, 2007; Mulugeta et al., 2011) and popular discourse indicate that CEE in Ethiopia has not been preparing citizens who can actively participate in all developmental issues of the country. This study aims to investigate the perceptions of Ethiopian students and educators as to who is responsible for fostering good citizenship. Specifically, it sought to understand their perceptions concerning the role of the three major stakeholders of CEE, that is, traditional institutions (family, community, and religious institutions), educational institutions (and their professionals), and non-academic institutions (Non-Governmental Organizations, political parties, and the media), in 1 This was the major legal instrument of the country that served as a constitution before the promulgation of the 1995 constitution. 2 This is the official name of Citizenship Education in Ethiopia. mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 106 preparing good citizenship. To that end, the present study is organized under the following three research questions: How do students and educators perceive the role of traditional institutions in preparing good citizenship? How do students and educators understand the responsibility of educational institutions and their professionals in preparing good citizenship? How do students and educators conceptualize non-academic institutions’ role in preparing good citizenship? Needless to say, without a proper perception/attitude towards a certain issue, we are less likely to properly practice that issue. The present study, therefore, is expected to be significant in understanding the school community’s perception on the responsibility of good citizenship, as it will have direct implications for policymaking and classroom practices. For instance, based on the findings of the study, school practitioners, educational managers at different levels, and educational policymakers will have a better understanding of the topic under discussion. This in turn will help them to devise strategies that will meaningfully contribute to realizing the agenda of good citizenship in Ethiopia. This study is also expected to be important to the international reader, as it has tried to illuminate the issue of good citizenship in the non-western world with no/little research account. In this regard, the findings of the study could serve as one source of discussion on Citizenship Education in the developing world in general and the sub-Saharan region in particular. As far as the limitation of the present study is concerned, it is better to be aware of the following issues. First of all, the study was delimited geographically to four districts, 20 schools, and a limited number of research participants. Besides, it was delimited to the investigation of only students’ and school practitioners’ perceptions on the responsibilities of good citizenship. The study did not examine the reasons behind participants’ perceptions and the actual involvement of stakeholders in the process of good citizenship. Hence, the conclusions and generalizations of the study should be used cautiously. Who is Responsible for Good Citizenship? A Brief Look at the Literature The task for democratic good citizenship is a formidable process that requires the active participation of different stakeholders. Stated another way, the involvement of different individuals, groups, and institutions is decisive for the success of any Citizenship Education program (Davies et al., 1999; Gardner, et al., 2000; MoE, 2007; Parker, 1990; Sharma, 2006; Taneja, 1990). Many citizenship educators (e.g., Parker, 2014; Quisumbing, 2002; Sharma, 2006; Taneja, 1990) contend that the family is the first important institution responsible for the teaching of major mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 107 citizenship values. Taneja (1990), for instance, believes that the family is the first school where the first instructions of citizenship are acquired. As indicated by this educator, the child learns the first lessons about how to live with others, belongingness, personality, courtesy, co- operation, and responsibility in her/his home. Supporting this idea, Quisumbing (2002) indicates that the family is the first agency for socialization that enables the young individual to acquire the knowledge, values, attitudes, and skills necessary for good citizenship. These ideas imply that the family, as the first social institution for children, plays a pivotal role in the teaching of various citizenship values. This, in turn, implies that failure to involve this institution could lead to poor achievements in Citizenship Education. Similarly, many citizenship educators contend that the community is another important social organization with much responsibility for good citizenship. Cook and Westheimer (2006), for example, showed that the community is the best site for the teaching of democratic citizenship Though many institutions are responsible for good citizenship, the role that schools play is unique and decisive. According to Parker (2005), schools are the best places for the teaching of democratic Citizenship Education. For him, the diversity that schools demonstrate is less likely to be found in other social institutions such as the home, the church, the temple, or the mosque. Berlach (1996) and Branson (1998) also believe that schools are the most appropriate institutions for the teaching of Citizenship Education. The effectiveness of any school-based Citizenship Education program, however, largely depends on what is going on in each classroom. In this regard, teachers, as the ultimate curriculum implementers, play a decisive role in realizing the vision of Citizenship Education (Gardner, et al., 2000; Parker, 2005, 2014). It is the successful implementation of the curriculum by each individual teacher that culminates in the success of school missions. From this idea, therefore, one can understand that the role of teachers is critical to realize the mission of Citizenship Education. However, the question “Should Citizenship Education be taught by a specialist or a generalist teacher?” has been one important issue in the field of Citizenship Education (Kerr, 1999; Taneja, 1990). Nevertheless, many educators insist that the teaching of Citizenship Education should not be left only for some groups of teachers. In line with this, Taneja (1990) has the following to say: The responsibility for such education [Civic Education] devolves upon every subject and every teacher on the staff. Each subject contains its own disciplines and thus contributes to the development of character and intellect, which is essential for a thorough mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 108 understanding of the concepts of citizens….The teachers of language, mathematics, science, art, music, etc. have the supreme responsibility of inculcating among the children the values, ideas, and skills of good citizenship. (Taneja, 1990, p. 231) The experience of many countries in teaching Citizenship Education is also consistent with the idea of Taneja (1990). For instance, as Kerr (1999) reported, in most of the countries he investigated there was no specific initial and in-service training for Civics teachers. For this educator, the general trend was using generalist teachers in teaching the subject. National governments are not and should not be the only stakeholders in the process of Citizenship Education. Instead, many other institutions need to be involved (Davies, et al., 1999; McCowan, 2009; Parker, 2014; UNDP, 2004; Yishaq, 2007). For instance, civil society organizations and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) are considered as strong partners of Citizenship Education. As Yishaq (2007) argued, NGOs are more effective than public institutions in the field of Citizenship Education due to their innovative practices, flexible approaches, utilization of diverse methods, and their proximity to the grassroots level. According to the UNDP (2004), civil society organizations could play a significant role in the process of citizenship teaching. Their role in advocating for human rights, motivating people to participate in political processes, training for effective leadership, and promoting a favorable legal environment is reported to be important. Institutions such as the media, political parties, and religious institutions also play important roles in realizing the vision for good citizenship (Branson, 1998; Cook & Westheimer, 2006; Davies, et al., 1999; Sharma, 2006; UNDP, 2004). For instance, according to the UNDP (2004), an independent, neutral, pluralist, professional, and socially responsible media plays a significant role in the process of Citizenship Education. Cook and Westheimer (2006) also contend that the media, if properly approached, contributes a lot in realizing the mission of Citizenship Education. To sum up, the agenda for good citizenship needs the wholehearted participation of many stakeholders. Though the stakeholders for good citizenship are many in number, in this study, they are classified as traditional institutions (family, community, and religious institutions), educational institutions and their professionals, and non-academic institutions outside schools. Hence, the present study attempts to investigate the perceptions of Ethiopian students and educators on the responsibility of these major stakeholders of good citizenship. mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 109 Methodology Design of the Study As indicated earlier, the purpose of this study was to investigate the school community's perception on the responsibility of major stakeholders for good citizenship. To achieve this purpose, a descriptive survey design using quantitative data gathering and analysis methods was employed. Research Participants The participants of this study were students, teachers, and school leaders selected from four districts and 20 schools located in East Gojjam Administrative Zone of the Amhara regional state, Ethiopia. The study area is inhabited by the Amhara people who speak the Amharic language; the overwhelming majority of the people in this area are Orthodox Christians. Due to this, the research participants who took part in this study were from these linguistic and religious backgrounds. During data gathering, there were 18 districts in East Gojjam Administrative Zone. From these districts, four of them were selected using a purposive sampling technique. From the four districts, 14 upper primary (5-8), 4 general secondary (9-10), and 2 preparatory (11-12) schools were selected using the same sampling technique. Half (7) of the upper primary and all of the general secondary and preparatory schools were located in small towns. The remaining 7 upper primary schools, however, were found in rural areas. Geographical convenience and staff size were the criteria that the researcher used to select the sample districts and schools. From the schools selected, all CEE teachers and school leaders (principals, vice principals, and supervisors) were selected using a comprehensive sampling technique. This is because their number was not large enough to be sampled through probability sampling. In this regard, a total of 42 CEE teachers (89%), and 29 school leaders (76%) who were on duty during data gathering were selected as the sample of the study. As far as the number of students is concerned, a total of 410 students from the upper grades of each cycle (grades 8, 10, and 12) were selected using a stratified sampling technique. The reason for selecting students at the upper-grade levels of each cycle is due to the fact that students at these grade levels are more mature and experienced than students at the lower grades and would provide better information on the issue under investigation. In terms of sex, the majority of students (56%) were males while the remaining 44% were females. Residence-wise, 39% of mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 110 the students were from rural schools while the remaining 61% were from urban schools. In terms of school level, 56%, 28%, and 16% of the students were from the upper primary, general secondary, and preparatory schools, respectively. Students were between 14 and 18 years old. Like the student participants, non-CEE teachers were selected by using a stratified sampling technique. In this regard, 157 (30%) non-CEE teachers, out of 523 teachers from the sample schools, were selected. Overall, a total of 410 students, 42 CEE teachers, 157 non-CEE teachers, and 29 school leaders were selected as samples of this study. Procedures and Methods of Data Gathering As a descriptive survey, this study relies on quantitative data collected through a questionnaire. The questionnaire was prepared in Amharic language. The major duties and responsibilities of CEE stakeholders in Ethiopia were referred while preparing this instrument. The instrument had 62 Likert-type closed-ended items ranging from 1 (very low) to 5 (very high). In order to check the reliability of the questionnaire, pilot testing was conducted in two schools (one primary and one secondary) that were not selected for the main study. With the help of a colleague, an attempt was also made to check the content and face validity of the instrument. After getting the permission of concerned bodies and the consent of participants, the researcher proceeded to the actual data gathering process. The questionnaires were administered by the researcher himself, and attempts were made to briefly orient the research participants, particularly the students, on the purposes and procedures of filling out the questionnaire. Students filled out the questionnaires in their classrooms in the presence of the researcher. All of the questionnaires distributed to the participants were returned to the researcher. Data Analysis The data obtained from the questionnaire were analyzed using quantitative data analysis techniques. Two descriptive statistical tools, mean and standard deviation, were used. Finally, in this study, unreserved efforts were made to strictly observe the major ethical principles of research. In this regard, the duty of a researcher to respect the rights, needs, values, and desires of participants during the data gathering and analysis processes were given due attention. mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 111 Findings Participants’ Perception on the Role of Traditional Institutions As indicated earlier, the first research question of this study is: “How do students and educators perceive the role of traditional institutions in preparing good citizenship?” For this purpose, respondents (i.e., students, CEE teachers, non-CEE teachers, and school leaders) were asked to rate, using 14 survey items, the role that these institutions could play. Their responses are presented in Table 1. Table 1 Respondents’ Ratings on the Responsibility of Traditional Institutions Respondent Traditional Institution Family Local Community Religious Institutions M SD M SD M SD Students (n=410) 3.0 .80 2.7 .55 3.2 .69 CEE Teachers (n=42) 3.2 .76 2.7 .45 3.4 .49 Non-CEE Teachers (n=157) 2.8 .75 2.5 .62 3.5 .73 School Leaders (n=29) 3.3 .78 2.7 .63 3.3 .49 Grand Mean 3.0 .77 2.6 .56 3.3 .6 As shown in Table 1, the grand means of the three groups of participants concerning the responsibility of family and religious institutions are around the expected mean (3). This result implies that these two institutions were perceived as having a modest (medium) role in the development of good citizenship. However, the grand mean of the three respondents regarding the responsibility of the local community is below the expected mean. From this result, it is possible to understand that the responsibilities of these institutions on the issue under consideration were not perceived as very crucial. Overall, the results obtained from Table 1 suggest that, in the eyes of Ethiopian students mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 112 and educators, the responsibilities of the three traditional institutions in the process of preparing good citizenship were not decisive. Participants’ Perception on the Role of Educational Institutions and their Professionals Understanding students' and educators' perception on the responsibility of educational institutions (i.e., schools, district education offices, and their professionals) in relation to good citizenship was another concern of this study. Using 35 survey items, participants were asked to rate their responsibility for good citizenship. Their responses are presented in Tables 2, 3, 4, and 5. Table 2 Respondents’ Ratings on the Responsibility of Schools and District Education Offices Respondent Schools District Education Offices M SD M SD Students (n=410) 4.20 .81 1.80 .92 CEE Teachers (n=42) 4.10 .95 1.80 .76 Non-CEE Teachers (n=157) 4.00 .90 2.10 .94 School Leaders (n=29) 4.63 .49 2.36 .49 Grand Mean 4.23 .78 2.01 .77 As indicated in Table 2, students, CEE teachers, non-CEE teachers, and school leaders rated the responsibility of schools vis-à-vis good citizenship more than the expected mean (3). The grand mean, in particular, suggests that the perception of Ethiopian students and educators concerning the responsibility of school institutions was very high. This, in turn, implies that there has been much reliance on schools in the process of good citizenship. However, as can be seen in the same table, district education offices’ responsibility in the process of good citizenship was not well acknowledged. This is because all of the respondents rated their responsibility below the expected mean. The result implies that these institutions have not been visible to the school community in discharging their responsibility for good citizenship. mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 113 Table 3 Respondents’ Ratings on the Responsibility of Teachers and School Leaders Respondent CEE Teachers Non-CEE Teachers Principals Supervisors M SD M SD M SD M SD Students (n=410) 4.25 .88 2.29 .43 2.50 .74 2.10 .76 CEE Teachers (n=42) 4.70 .46 2.01 .21 2.90 .54 2.76 .50 Non-CEE Teachers (n=157) 4.50 .81 2.18 .23 2.80 .60 2.30 .78 School Leaders (n=29) 4.54 .50 2.31 .03 3.63 .80 3.00 .61 Grand Mean 4.49 .66 2.19 .22 2.95 .67 2.54 .66 Table 3 presents respondents’ ratings concerning the responsibility of teachers (both CEE and non-CEE teachers) and school leaders (principals and supervisors) in the preparation of good citizenship. All of the respondents rated the responsibility of CEE teachers for good citizenship highly, as the grand mean of all respondents was more than 4. Respondents’ ratings on the role of non-CEE teachers, however, were below the expected mean. This implies that students and educators did not recognize the role that these teachers play in the process of good citizenship as decisive. As can be seen in the same table, except the mean of schools leaders, all of the respondents rated the responsibility of principals and supervisors below the expected mean. This result implies that the role of school leaders in the process of good citizenship was somewhat low. Participants’ Perception on the Role of Non-academic Institutions In order to answer the third basic research question (“How do students and educators conceptualize non-academic institutions’ role in preparing good citizenship?”), 13 survey items were presented to the research participants. Their ratings are presented in Table 4. mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 114 Table 4 Respondents’ Ratings on the Responsibility of Non-academic Institutions Respondent Non-academic Institution NGOs Mass Media Political Parties M SD M SD M SD Students (n=410) 2.10 .53 2.10 .53 1.65 .65 CEE Teachers (n=42) 2.50 .50 2.60 .67 2.06 .59 Non-CEE Teachers (n=157) 2.63 .49 2.90 .68 2.54 .50 School Leaders (n=29) 2.30 .46 2.40 .66 1.90 .70 Grand Mean 2.38 .49 2.5 .63 2.03 .61 Table 4 shows the means and grand means of students,’ CEE teachers,’ non-CEE teachers,’ and school leaders’ ratings concerning the responsibility of NGOs, mass media, and political parties in preparing good citizenship. However, as can be seen in this table, their ratings were below the expected mean. From the grand mean of the respondents, it is also possible to understand that among the three institutions, political parties were perceived to have the least responsibility. The second from the bottom are NGOs. Generally, this result suggests that the responsibility of the three non- academic institutions in building good citizenship was not adequately acknowledged by the Ethiopian school communities. Discussion As already stated, for the success of any Citizenship Education program, the responsibility for good citizenship must be shared among its major stakeholders. It was in line with this idea that the present study has attempted to assess the perception of Ethiopian students and educators as to who is responsible for good citizenship. However, the findings of the study suggest that most of the Ethiopian stakeholders for good citizenship were not satisfactorily recognized. mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 115 For instance, traditional institutions such as the family, local community, and religious institutions were perceived by Ethiopian students and educators as having only a modest role. The findings of the study also revealed that there has been much reliance on schools and their CEE teachers for the preparation of good citizenship. Besides, from the present study it was understood that other powerful stakeholders of Citizenship Education within the education system (e.g., non- CEEC teachers, school principals, and supervisors) were not considered important in the process of good citizenship. The study also revealed that members of school communities did not adequately recognize the role that non-academic institutions play in preparing good citizenship. Most of the findings of the present study are consistent with some research findings and ideas of renowned citizenship educators. For instance, the finding related to the traditional stakeholders of Citizenship Education is found to be similar to that of the UNESCO (2003). In that study, the participation of the traditional upholders of ethical and citizenship values was reported to be declining. The present finding on the same issue is also similar to the positions of some famous social studies educators. For instance, it is in line with the ideas of Parker (2014), who showed that the involvement of parents in the process of democratic citizenship was unsatisfactory. This study also strengthens the conclusion of Cook and Westheimer (2004), who reported inadequate participation of the community in the process of good citizenship. Although further studies are necessary to better understand the reason(s) behind the inadequate involvement of traditional institutions, it is possible to reflect on one of the possible factors. The author, based on his personal experience and observations, believes that one of the possible reasons for the rhetoric-reality gap on the participation of traditional institutions is related to the general demographic characteristics of the Ethiopian population. Ethiopia, as one of the least developed sub-Saharan African countries, is inhabited by more than 80 million people. Of these, about 80% live in the rural areas engaged in traditional farming and pastoralism. This part of the population is also illiterate and unfamiliar with the basics of democratic good citizenship. In this social context, therefore, expecting parents, the local community, and religious institutions to discharge their responsibilities for good citizenship seems illogical. Hence, this general social context of Ethiopia, the researcher contends, could be the major reason why these traditional institutions were perceived to be insignificant in preparing good citizenship. Some Citizenship Education scholars (e.g., Parker, 1990) contend that the social studies curriculum and its teachers are more responsible than any other stakeholder in the preparation mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 116 of democratic good citizenship. The present study is also found to be consistent with this idea. This is because its finding on the issue under discussion showed that CEE teachers in Ethiopia were perceived to be more responsible than any other professional and institution in the process of good citizenship. This perception of the participants implies that CEE teachers were discharging their responsibility of good citizenship better than any other stakeholder. The present study’s finding on the role of non-academic institutions was also somewhat consistent with some previous studies. For instance, it supports the position of McCowan (2009), who concludes that the involvement of NGOs in Citizenship Education was unsatisfactory. It is also in line with the finding of Cook and Westheimer (2006). In that study, the authors reported that the involvement of the media in the process of democratic citizenship was insufficient. From the above discussion, therefore, it is possible to understand that the major challenges of Citizenship Education, particularly those related to its stakeholder participation, are somewhat pervasive in all parts of the world. This study confirms that most of the problems of Citizenship Education identified by many scholars globally are also challenges for CEE in Ethiopia. Conclusions and Implications Based on the findings of the present study, the following conclusions are made. First, students and educators in Ethiopian schools perceived traditional institutions as less important in building good citizens. In other words, traditional institutions’ ability in bringing up good citizens was not given much credence. Second, in this study it was understood that there has been much reliance on schools and their CEE teachers for the preparation of good citizenship. Other in-school stakeholders of Citizenship Education such as non-CEE teachers, principals, and supervisors were not considered strong partners for good citizenship. Finally, in this study, the role of some non- academic institutions (e.g., NGOs, political parties, and the media), in building good citizenship was not perceived to be decisive. Overall, the perception of Ethiopian students and educators as to whose responsibility is good citizenship was found to be narrow, incomplete, and unsatisfactory. The findings of this study have far-reaching implications requiring much work in the future. This work needs to focus on the following areas: First, all concerned bodies need to exert unreserved efforts to create awareness on the responsibility of good citizenship. To be specific, government bodies need to conduct recurrent discussions with school practitioners focusing on their roles and responsibilities for fostering good citizenship. mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 117 Second is the need to conduct big nation-wide research projects on the issue under consideration. The research projects need to aim at exploring the reasons behind students’ and educators’ narrow, incomplete, and unsatisfactory perceptions on the responsibilities of many stakeholders of good citizenship. Furthermore, through more advanced research methods, they need to explore the actual involvement of stakeholders in the process of good citizenship. Finally, it is always important to remember that the preparation of democratic good citizenship and the building up of a democratic system are formidable tasks that require the wholehearted participation and passionate commitment of all its stakeholders. As Davies, Gregory, and Riley (1999, p. 156) convincingly indicated, “in a participative democracy, everyone is a teacher.” This idea needs to be considered as the best answer to the question, “Who is responsible for good citizenship?” The noble aim of Citizenship Education and the preparation of democratic good citizenship cannot remain a dream in developing countries like Ethiopia, provided that an enabling environment that allows the active participation of all its stakeholders is created. mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 118 References: Akalewold, E. (2005). Civics and ethics education curriculum policy: Recent government’s interest and subsequent development. IER Flambeau, 13(2), 39-56. Berlach, R. G. (1996). Citizenship education: Australian and Singaporean perspectives. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 21(2), 1-15. Branson, M. S. (1998). The role of civic education. Washington, DC: Center for Civic Education. Cogan, J. J., & Derricott, R. (2000). Citizenship for the 21st century: An international perspective on education. London, England: Kogan Page Limited. Cook, S., & Westheimer, J. (2006). Introduction: Education and democracy. Canadian Journal of Education, 29(2), 347-358. Davies, I., Gregory, I., & Riley, S. C. (1999).Good citizenship and educational provision. London, England: Falmer Press. Gardner, R., Cairns, J., & Lawton, D. (2000).Education for values: Moral, ethics, and citizenship in contemporary teaching. London, England: Kogan Page Limited. Girma, A. (2006). The implementation of grade 8 civic and ethical education: The case of Addis Ababa city administration. Unpublished MA Thesis, AAU. Kerr, D. (1999). Citizenship education: An international comparison. Retrieved on November 4, 2010 from http://www.inca.org.uk/pdf/citizenship-no- intro.pdf McCowan, T. (2009). Rethinking citizenship education: A curriculum for participatory democracy. London, England: Continuum. Meron, T. (2006). Civic education and students of higher learning: A case study. Proceedings of the 4th national conference on private higher Education in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa: St. Mary’s University College. MoE – Ministry of Education. (2002). The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia education sector development program II: Program action plan. Addis Ababa: Ministry of Education MoE – Ministry of Education. (2005). The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia education sector development program III: Program action plan. Addis Ababa: Ministry of Education, MoE – Ministry of Education. (2007). Blueprint of civic and ethical education. Addis Ababa: EMPDA. mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ http://www.inca.org.uk/pdf/citizenship-no-%20%20          intro.pdf Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 119 Mulugeta, Y. (2011). Fostering societal values through appropriate strategies: The case of some selected schools in East Gojjam administrative zone. Journal of Teacher Education, 2(1), 31-61. Mulugeta, Y., Animaw, T., Desalegn, B., & Belay, T. (2011). Evaluative research on the effectiveness of civic and ethical education program: With particular reference to schools in East Gojjam administrative zone. Journal of Educational Research, 1(1), 27- 56. Parker, W. C. (1990). Assessing citizenship. The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Retrieved on October 1, 2017, from http://www.ascd.org/ ASCD/ pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_199011_parker.pdf Parker, W. C. (2005). Teaching against idiocy. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(5), 344-351. Parker, W. C. (2014). Citizenship education in the United States: Regime type, foundational issues, and classroom practice. In L. P. Nucci, D. Narvaez, & T. Krettenauer (Eds.), The Handbook of Moral and Character Education (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. Parker, W. C., & Jarolimek, J. (1997). Social studies in elementary education (10th ed.). Toronto, Canada: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Pritchard, M. S. (1996). Responsible children. Kansas: University Press of Kansas. Quisumbing, L. R. (2002). Citizenship education for better world societies: A holistic approach. Retrieved January 23, 2017, from http://www.humiliationstudies.org/documents /%20QuisumbingCitizenship.pdf Sharma, Y. K. (2006). Sociological philosophy of education. New Delhi, India: Kanishka Publishers. Solomon, A. (2008). Policy formulation, curriculum development and implementation in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa: The Book Center, Addis Ababa University. Taneja, V. R. (1990). Educational thought and practice. New Delhi, India: Sterling Publishers. TGE – Transitional Government of Ethiopia. (1994). Education and training policy. Addis Ababa: EMPDA. UNDP – United Nations Development Program. (2004). Civic Education: Practical Guidance Note. Retrieved on October 17, 2010, from http://www.undp.org/oslocentre/docs 04/ civic%20educatio.pdf UNESCO – United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2003). Report of the working group on the teaching of ethics. Paris, France: COMEST. mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/ http://www.ascd.org/%20ASCD/%20pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_199011_parker.pdf http://www.ascd.org/%20ASCD/%20pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_199011_parker.pdf http://www.humiliationstudies.org/documents%20/%20QuisumbingCitizenship.pdf http://www.humiliationstudies.org/documents%20/%20QuisumbingCitizenship.pdf http://www.undp.org/oslocentre/docs%2004/ Journal of International Social Studies, v. 8, n. 2, 2018, pp. 103-120 Corresponding author: gashu65@gmail.com ©2012/2018 National Council for Social Studies International Assembly http://www.iajiss.org ISSN: 2327-3585 Page 120 Westheimer, J., & Kahne, J. (2004). What kind of citizen? The politics of educating for democracy. American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 237-269. About the Author: Mulugeta Yayeh Worku is an instructor at the Department of Teacher Education and Curriculum Studies, Bahir Dar University, Ethiopia. He teaches courses of teacher education and curriculum studies. His research interest includes teacher education, action research and citizenship education. Currently, he is finalizing his PhD dissertation focusing on the role of education in social reconstruction. mailto:gashu65@gmail.com http://www.iajiss.org/