Developing the political citizen

How teachers are navigating the statutory demands of the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 205 and the Prevent Duty

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The ‘Revised Prevent Duty Guidance for England and Wales’ presents statutory guidance under section 29 of the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015. This guidance states that ‘Schools should be safe spaces in which children and young people can understand and discuss sensitive topics, including terrorism and the extremist ideas that are part of terrorist ideology, and learn how to challenge these ideas. The Prevent Duty is not intended to limit discussion of these issues’. The Prevent Duty also requires schools to identify pupils at risk of radicalisation and have in place ‘robust safeguarding policies’. Schools that are unable to satisfy Office for Standards in Education will be subject to ‘intervention’ (maintained schools) or ‘termination of funding’ (academies and free schools). This article explores the interplay between the statutory requirement to provide opportunity for pupils to debate and explore issues relating to citizenship in the public sphere in the light of religious and political discourses and the statutory requirement to monitor and report potential ‘vulnerable’ pupils. It asks what measures are employed to judge ‘vulnerability’ and ‘risk’ when they are encouraged to promote debate and active political engagement. The article argues that in discharging their Prevent Duty, teachers become self-regulating, ‘governmentable subjects’ themselves.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)213-226
Number of pages14
JournalEducation, Citizenship and Social Justice
Volume12
Issue number3
Early online date9 Aug 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

terrorism
act
citizen
teacher
pupil
school
radicalization
academy
vulnerability
citizenship
ideology
funding
discourse
education

Cite this

@article{8f5c226c805a4e60b1d7c84b847ed57d,
title = "Developing the political citizen: How teachers are navigating the statutory demands of the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 205 and the Prevent Duty",
abstract = "The ‘Revised Prevent Duty Guidance for England and Wales’ presents statutory guidance under section 29 of the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015. This guidance states that ‘Schools should be safe spaces in which children and young people can understand and discuss sensitive topics, including terrorism and the extremist ideas that are part of terrorist ideology, and learn how to challenge these ideas. The Prevent Duty is not intended to limit discussion of these issues’. The Prevent Duty also requires schools to identify pupils at risk of radicalisation and have in place ‘robust safeguarding policies’. Schools that are unable to satisfy Office for Standards in Education will be subject to ‘intervention’ (maintained schools) or ‘termination of funding’ (academies and free schools). This article explores the interplay between the statutory requirement to provide opportunity for pupils to debate and explore issues relating to citizenship in the public sphere in the light of religious and political discourses and the statutory requirement to monitor and report potential ‘vulnerable’ pupils. It asks what measures are employed to judge ‘vulnerability’ and ‘risk’ when they are encouraged to promote debate and active political engagement. The article argues that in discharging their Prevent Duty, teachers become self-regulating, ‘governmentable subjects’ themselves.",
keywords = "Counter-Terrorism and Security Act, governmentality, prevent, Prevent Duty, teachers",
author = "Hazel Bryan",
year = "2017",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1746197917717841",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "213--226",
journal = "Education, Citizenship and Social Justice",
issn = "1746-1979",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Developing the political citizen

T2 - How teachers are navigating the statutory demands of the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 205 and the Prevent Duty

AU - Bryan, Hazel

PY - 2017/11/1

Y1 - 2017/11/1

N2 - The ‘Revised Prevent Duty Guidance for England and Wales’ presents statutory guidance under section 29 of the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015. This guidance states that ‘Schools should be safe spaces in which children and young people can understand and discuss sensitive topics, including terrorism and the extremist ideas that are part of terrorist ideology, and learn how to challenge these ideas. The Prevent Duty is not intended to limit discussion of these issues’. The Prevent Duty also requires schools to identify pupils at risk of radicalisation and have in place ‘robust safeguarding policies’. Schools that are unable to satisfy Office for Standards in Education will be subject to ‘intervention’ (maintained schools) or ‘termination of funding’ (academies and free schools). This article explores the interplay between the statutory requirement to provide opportunity for pupils to debate and explore issues relating to citizenship in the public sphere in the light of religious and political discourses and the statutory requirement to monitor and report potential ‘vulnerable’ pupils. It asks what measures are employed to judge ‘vulnerability’ and ‘risk’ when they are encouraged to promote debate and active political engagement. The article argues that in discharging their Prevent Duty, teachers become self-regulating, ‘governmentable subjects’ themselves.

AB - The ‘Revised Prevent Duty Guidance for England and Wales’ presents statutory guidance under section 29 of the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015. This guidance states that ‘Schools should be safe spaces in which children and young people can understand and discuss sensitive topics, including terrorism and the extremist ideas that are part of terrorist ideology, and learn how to challenge these ideas. The Prevent Duty is not intended to limit discussion of these issues’. The Prevent Duty also requires schools to identify pupils at risk of radicalisation and have in place ‘robust safeguarding policies’. Schools that are unable to satisfy Office for Standards in Education will be subject to ‘intervention’ (maintained schools) or ‘termination of funding’ (academies and free schools). This article explores the interplay between the statutory requirement to provide opportunity for pupils to debate and explore issues relating to citizenship in the public sphere in the light of religious and political discourses and the statutory requirement to monitor and report potential ‘vulnerable’ pupils. It asks what measures are employed to judge ‘vulnerability’ and ‘risk’ when they are encouraged to promote debate and active political engagement. The article argues that in discharging their Prevent Duty, teachers become self-regulating, ‘governmentable subjects’ themselves.

KW - Counter-Terrorism and Security Act

KW - governmentality

KW - prevent

KW - Prevent Duty

KW - teachers

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85032389290&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1746197917717841

DO - 10.1177/1746197917717841

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 213

EP - 226

JO - Education, Citizenship and Social Justice

JF - Education, Citizenship and Social Justice

SN - 1746-1979

IS - 3

ER -