Political Socialisation

Would you agree that the family and school remain the primary agents of political socialisation today? Justify your response with examples.

Barry Gilheany (c)

In previous generations this statement would have been unchallengeable. Research into this area in the 1960s appeared to prove definitively that one's family and (especially) secondary educational establishment were the principal transmission mechanisms for political socialisation. However this essay, while not discounting the roles of the family home and school in political socialisation, argues that this is no longer the case. It paints a more complex picture of how young people relate to politics; examining to what extent the oft-mentioned phenomenon of the alienation from political engagement is and the pervasive influence of digital technology and globalisation on the political allegiances of young people. It argues that even where home and school remain salient influences, the effects of such have to be controlled for the socio-economic background of students. It also discusses the importance of new research paradigms that have emerged since the turn of the millennium to fill the lacunae that existed in political socialisation research since the 1960s.

The term “political socialisation” has been coined to cover all the studies into the ways in which people acquire “political personalities”. Crucial to this essay is the notion that all political activity is learned and the questions: who learns what kind of political lessons, when, where, how and why and with what consequences (Williams: p.226)

Research into this question carries four caveats. Firstly, the difficulty of translating experience of young people in one culture into an other culture Secondly, political socialisation is a lifelong process and it is very difficult to define clearly the stages of development for both individuals Thirdly, political lessons such as basic national, ethnic, tribal and class loyalties are learned very early in life. Fourthly, political identity, including national identity, is only one aspect of an individual's identity. It is related to other identity components such as age, race, gender, religion, class, family circumstances and physical and cognitive abilities. Mapped onto these questions are the consequences of globalisation: mass migration, international terrorism and instability and ethnic conflict in the Middle East and the Balkans (Williams: p.226).

Early writings, based largely on US research findings, on political socialisation of children, postulated a series of stages much influenced by the psychological research of Piaget and his colleagues. In early childhood, it was suggested that pre-school children develop a purely emotional attachment to their political community. On entry to elementary school, the child learns that they are rich or poor, belong to a special elite group or oppressed minority group while also learning that they are of a particular nationality or ethnicity and of one political party or another . In secondary school, children become more politically sophisticated; developing awareness of community concerns and a capacity to think through political issues and become less authoritarian (Williams: pp.226-27).

In her analysis of the German study 'Learning to Live Democracy' (LLD), initiated in 1999, which sought to close the research gap in relation to political orientations of young children in Germany and to improve the theoretical and empirical knowledge of political socialisation in early childhood (Abendschon: p.34) , Abendschon identifies two analytically distinct mechanisms in regard to the family's role in the child's development of politically relevant value formations. One is an attitudinal pathway that assumes value transmission from parent to child. The other is a social milieu pathway that works via shared socio-structural characteristics. Particularly influential in the latter pathway are gender, socio-economic environment and ethnic origin (Abendschon: p.57). She finds that for some value orientations, value transmissions works better within the family but that value transmissions processes in early childhood are often supplanted by social milieu pathways. But she cautions that other variables should be considered future research such as family interactions and parenting styles. (Abendschon: p.58)

In most societies, children learn about politics through civic education. Education ministries devise curricula that express national or civic values and through which children are given role models and key moments from national history to study. They are given opportunities to acquire political knowledge and acumen. Nations do in the civic education programmes that are delivered with most liberal democracies seeking to avoid overt intervention in this area (Williams: pp.227-28) although the drive by recent UK governments to promote specifically “British” values in schools could by seen by critics as doing just that.

The 'International Civic and Citizenship Education Study 2009' conducted by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) sought to examine the levels and the development of civic knowledge. It produced an impressive array of data on students' attitudes and behaviours and on the context in which learning and the acquisition of democratic attitudes take place (Garcia-Albacete: pp.93-94). Garcia-Albacete's analysis of these datasets did find that civic education impacts on individual levels of student political interest. She found that an open classroom climate in which students can freely debate social and political issues' the provision of extra-curricular activities in civic education and schools' explicit commitment to promote students' political knowledge and future political participation all augur well for the development of political interest (Garcia-Albacete: p.104)However these conclusions are tempered by the differing effects of civic educationdependent on students' socio-economic background and civic education characteristic tested. Although openness in class discussions had a positive effect for all student groups, the effect was more pronounced for students whose parents have either the highest or lowest level of education. A similar finding emerges when considering the effects of students' political interest of schools having explicit participatory aims. Again and to an even greater degree, civic education seems more capable of promoting political interest in those students from the highest and lowest socio-economic backgrounds (Garcia-Albacete: p.104). She concludes that civic education has a stronger effect on those students who spend less time discussing politics with their parents (Garcia- Albacete: p.105).

To conclude, political socialisation is significantly shaped by the parameters of the society in which it is embedded. Political learning occurs today in vastly differing circumstances compared to when political socialisation was seen as the new research “growth stock” a few decades ago. The younger generations of today face vastly different geopolitical challenges to those of their forebears in the forms of digitally driven mediatisation processes, mass migration, European integration and the fall out from wars in Iraq ,Afghanistan and Syria plus the emergence of populist and nativist discontents of globalisation (of which Brexit and Trump are manifestations). Along with the decline in traditional party political attachments, these developments have created a new socialisation nexus in which today's generations have developed multiple social and political identities rather than a unipolar national one.(Abendschon, Ed: p.2). Although the roles of family and school remain influential agents of political socialisation, the participation of young millennials in horizontal and global networks such as the Occupy movement and the various Arab Spring movements demonstrate that peer group mobilisation and cyberspace are of greater relevance.

Bibliography

1. Abendschon, S. Introduction: Political Socialisation in a Changing World (pp.1-10) in Abendschon, S., Ed. (2013) Growing into Politics. Contexts and Timing of Political Socialisation Colchester: ECPR Press ECPR (European Consortium for Political Research) Studies
2. Abendschon, S. Children's Political Socialisation within the Family: Value Transmission and Social Milieu Factors (pp.33-72) in Abendschon, S, Ed. (2013) Growing into Politics. Contexts and Timing of Political Socialisation Colchester: ECPR Press ECPR Studies
3. Garcia-Albacete, G.M. Promoting Political Interest in Schools: The Role of Civic Education (pp.91-114) in Abendschon, S,, Ed (2013) Growing into Politics. Context and Timing of Political Socialisation Colchester: ECPR Press ECPR Studies
4. Williams, M. National Identity: Political Socialisation and Youth (pp.225-230) in Robertson, M. and Williams, M., Eds (2004) Young People, Leisure and Place. Cross Cultural Perspectives. New York: Nova Science Publisher, Inc.