ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846
-A A +A

The Role of Teacher Education Programmes

Seema Sarohe ( teaches sociology at the Department of Education, University of Delhi.

Based on a study that explores the conceptions of citizenship among students of two popular teacher education programmes in Delhi, this article reveals how teacher education programmes are critical in influencing notions of citizenship, either by reinforcing the prevalent notions or in expanding the horizons within which citizenship is understood and practised. A strong empirical case is made for taking the curriculum and pedagogic processes of preparing teachers seriously, especially if educators hold the conviction that teachers can play a critical role in social transformation.

The 1990s witnessed an “explosion” of interest in citizenship studies globally, giving rise to new forms of citizenship (Kymlicka and Norman 1994). These new developments in citizenship studies captured the imagination of educationists as well. As the construct of citizenship is undergoing scrutiny and change, the need to develop a more active citizenry presents important challenges for teachers. In a classroom, which consists of children from diverse backgrounds, a teacher’s everyday interaction with the hidden and the official curriculum produces different meanings of exclusion and inclusion while defining citizenship. The teacher’s own frame of rationality comes to guide their interpretation of texts and other schooling processes, and it is their knowledge and beliefs which would influence what students would learn. It is, therefore, critical that we reflect on what assumptions these teachers carry when they enter a plural classroom.

Over the last one decade, a number of studies have focused on understanding conceptions of citizenship among pre-service teachers, in-service teachers and teacher educators (Banks 2001; Kennedy 2008). These studies indicate how the responsibility for empowering teachers lies with teacher educators. Batra (2005) asserts the need to address the education of teachers and that major responsibilities lie with teacher educators. They can provide opportunities to prospective teachers to develop as critical citizens. Pre-service teacher education programmes can play a critical role in shaping notions about citizenship, either by reinforcing popular notions or by enabling more nuanced conceptualisations.

This research aims to further add to this domain of study by exploring how student–teachers1 talk about citizenship in ways that matter to them. The attempt is to explore how student–teachers give discursive shape and content to their otherwise taken-for-granted understanding of citizenship. It also explores how various notions and constructs of citizenship are influenced by the courses of study and how student–teachers negotiate with these notions to construct their own understanding of citizenship.

Research Design and Approach

In order to investigate how the student–teachers of the Bachelor of Elementary Education (BElEd)2 programme and Diploma in Education (DEd)3 programme in Delhi construct notions of citizenship, this study employed a methodology that utilised qualitative as well as quantitative methods. The study was conducted between 2011 and 2016, and the associated fieldwork between 2012 and 2013. The research questions were framed in a way that allowed the exploration of student–teachers’ understanding and experiences from their perspective. The fieldwork comprised an initial self-administered questionnaire, followed by semi-structured interviews with 10 student–teachers from each programme of study. A total of 59 student–teachers responded to the questionnaire. Out of these, 23 student–teachers were from the BElEd programme and 036 student–teachers from the DEd programme. This was followed by two separate focus group discussions with students from each of the two programmes. Meanings of citizenship were teased out by shifting the analytical focus on student–teachers as active agents of the citizenship discourse.

DEd Student–teachers

For the student–teachers of the DEd programme, “being citizen” included the ideas of “the political citizen” and “the social citizen.” These two dimensions were further tied to the “idea of community” and “notion of participation.”

The overwhelming majority of student–teachers construes a “political citizen” as one who has a strong sense of belonging to the nation. This conception of citizenship has a legal and overarching sense of national identity that invisibilises caste, gender, religious and class affiliations. In other words, every individual who is born in the country is perceived as an equal and fellow citizen.

The notion of community is intricately tied to the idea of a nation. There appears to be an underlying assumption that the state does its best to protect the rights of its citizens. Therefore, a majority of student–teachers believe that their contribution should be limited to maintaining the existing “status quo” in society. The casting of one’s vote during elections and exercise of rights are considered as activities of a competent citizen. As student–teachers display a strong sentimental sense of “belonging to the nation,” national identity and citizenship mean one and the same thing for them.

Patriots, freedom fighters, and soldiers are lauded as ideal citizens. The majority consider themselves to be ordinary citizens who must revere the life of patriots. This is done by routine “remembering of the nation” during the daily school assembly and other banal ways. Billig (1995) describes how “banal nationalism” is reinforced through symbols, images and language which are deeply ingrained in the psyche of ordinary people. Rituals such as flag hoisting, reciting the national pledge, singing patriotic songs, and celebrating images of the Indian freedom struggle evoke the feeling of oneness.National symbols are perceived as cultural tools that instil a sense of national pride among these student–teachers.

The second kind of citizen is a “social citizen” who is located in the everyday context and with whom every student–teacher can easily identify. Citizens are expected to behave in a certain manner which makes them good, bad, ideal, or average citizens (Table 1). The ideal citizen is the ultimate reference point for every ordinary citizen. Therefore, the idea of a “good” and “bad” citizen is extracted from what is considered to be normative for a citizen in a given society.


A bad citizen is identified as someone who indulges in anti-social behaviour. The “good” citizen is defined as someone who desists from any kind of anti-social behaviour. An ideal citizen is perceived to be one who is responsible, dutiful, law-abiding and who obeys societal norms. The idea of a social citizen lays an emphasis on individual responsibilities. Three forms of activities are identified at the individual (personal) level: “voluntary work” and “being helpful;” “professional responsibilities;” and “work at home.” Voluntary work includes activities undertaken for the benefit of society and community. For example, any work done in national interest is accorded the highest value. The student–teachers identify specific acts of charity and voluntary work as evidence of active citizenship. “Being helpful” in the neighbourhood includes helping the poor and neighbours, and “doing citizenship” includes doing one’s “professional duties” sincerely.

While defining a “citizen,” the student–teachers also construct the idea of a “non-citizen.” They seem to believe that citizens residing within the national geographical territory are their “fellow citizens” and those residing outside are non-citizens. Moreover, some people who reside within the national territory are also considered as “non-citizens.” Homosexuals, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, people with anti-India views, interstate migrants, criminals, and refugees constitute this group of “non-citizens.”

The student–teachers’ construction of citizenship is highly masculine. A woman is perceived to be a “virtuous being,” “nurturer,” and “caregiver,” and her place in society is restricted mainly to the household. They perceive citizenship to be an activity that belongs primarily to the public sphere. This reflects a gendering of private and public domains for doing citizenship. This view renders women as having an inferior status as citizens.

While denying the existence of caste and other social categories, the student–teachers also create a category of citizens who do not avail of reservations and are therefore casteless and, hence, true citizens of India. Dalits are viewed as non-citizens because they are considered “not meritorious” and responsible for hampering the growth of the nation by availing the benefits of reservation. Dalits, thus, emerge as second-class citizens within the national territory. A citizen is, thus, constructed as an upper-caste Indian male who actualises his citizenship in the public domain.

BElEd Student–teachers

The notion of a citizen is constructed and described by the student–teachers of the BElEd programme in relation to their participation in society. The exercise of rights conferred by the state is perceived to be integral to the notion of citizenship. However, the awareness about these rights, how accessible these are, and the ability of individuals to assert them are equally important for these student–teachers.

The dominant idea reflected in the responses is that a citizen should be personally and socially responsible. A personally responsible citizen is someone who believes in “doing citizenship” at the local level. An example of this is keeping the neighbourhood clean or not littering. A socially responsible citizen acts for the benefit of society. An example of this is a citizen participating in socio-political processes to address and challenge issues of discrimination, oppression, and injustice.

As for these student–teachers, the idea of a community is not similar to that of a nation. The idea of a citizen for these student–teachers is derived from one’s membership in an epistemic community. What binds its members is a collective sense of social justice, not national and legal territory. They are aware that a mere entitlement to certain rights does not guarantee their realisation. The socio-economic categories of gender, class, caste, and religion determine the degree to which an individual can enjoy equal citizenship rights. In the context of disadvantaged groups, the student–teachers are able to reflect on the complex processes of being a citizen. That is, every citizen is also a member of religious, cultural, civic, economic, gender, and other groups. For example, these student–teachers assert that women suffer different forms of patriarchal oppression in different cultures. They also discuss what keeps women and others absent or silent in the political world.

The student–teachers define “doing citizenship” as an everyday act which extends beyond the “virtual public space” and includes the “private sphere” in its fold. They reject the notion that citizenship in the private realm is different from citizenship in the public realm.

Citizenship in the Education of Teachers

Two major findings emerge from this study. The first one is that the student–teachers’ responses can be analysed by using multiple theoretical frameworks while decoding their notions of citizenship. The second major finding is that, with some overlaps, there is a difference in the way student–teachers of the two teacher education programmes construct the concept of a citizen and tackle the issues related to citizenship. Thus, it became imperative to understand if the teacher education curriculum plays a pivotal role in shaping the student–teachers’ understanding of a citizen and issues related to citizenship.

Three major aspects of the teacher education programmes were explored through the voices of student–teachers: (i) theoretical constructs and frameworks contained in the curriculum; (ii) opportunities for fieldwork and engaged learning; and (iii) specific opportunities in the curriculum to learn from dissonance and conflict.

The interactions with student–teachers of the DEd programme reveal that the idea of citizenship learnt during the years of pre-service teacher education is based on values such as discipline, obedience, norm-compliance and dutifulness. It is interesting to note that these values are in sync with their earlier notion of a citizen as a passive, obedient, and law-abiding being. According to these students, the modern history of India and certain aspects of governance in the post-independence period form the basis of citizenship education. They believe that the social science textbooks in schools are helpful in learning about citizenship.

The BElEd programme provided the student–teachers with space to critically engage with the social issues they had learnt about in school. It helped them review, revise and sometimes reject their previously held notions about diversity and social justice. They identified three major learnings from the programme: the ability to question; engagement with conflict to create social change; and respect for diversity.

Engagement with theoretical constructs and frameworks: The student–teachers of the DEd programme described the role of two major theory papers in helping them shape their understanding of social issues. These were “Population Studies” and “Sociological Perspectives on Education.”

Respondent 2:4 In sociology, we read that we should comply with the norms and rules of society. Similarly, in regard to methods of teaching Hindi, we read how we can develop feelings of patriotism among our students by using patriotic songs and poems.

Respondent 5: We read about gender equality in some courses. It has helped me change my perspective on women’s issues to some extent. Nevertheless, this is not going to help much as no matter how much we change our perspective, women’s rights will continue to be violated.

Respondent 4: We have a teacher who always says that the nation comes before religion. I am also a very religious person, and I observe all the rituals related to my religion. But for me my nation comes much before my religion.

The responses show that the dominant view prevailing amongst these student–teachers is that of a consensual and conflict-free society. Their emphasis on national integration, national good, and obedient citizenship suggests that the idea of society is perceived within national boundaries, wherein all identities based on caste, gender and religion are glossed over or even denied in order to give prominence to an overarching national identity. Their responses reflect that “education for citizenship” is an education dominated by a universal discourse on citizenship. “Nationalism” and “patriotism” become the cornerstone of citizenship education for these student–teachers.

The student–teachers of the BElEd programme identify three courses that deal directly with issues of contemporary Indian society. These are “Contemporary India,” “Core Social Science,” and “Gender and Schooling.” They discussed the role played by each of these courses in developing their constructs of citizenship.

Respondent 2:5 TheContemporary India” course helped us in understanding society around us and the structures that discriminate and exclude people. In the course on basic concepts in education, we used these concepts to understand inequality with regard to education.

Respondent 4: I belong to a community where girls are married off after Class 10. I’m the first girl from my village who has gone for graduation and perhaps the only one who will go for postgraduation. It was very difficult to step out of that tradition and village to do BElEd and work afterwards. I actually had to fight with my parents. My father was against my graduation. Even today, he wants me to get married after BElEd. I told him that he cannot fix my marriage forcefully, and if he even thought about it, I will run away from the procession. This way I have prepared myself for the outside struggle as I have struggled within my family for my rights. After reading the gender and schooling course as well as political science, I developed more criticality and sensitivity.

Respondent 7: We once reflected on our household and our different positions in that. For example, who takes what decision in the family? Let’s talk about dinner. Who will decide the menu? Though I am usually asked what I want to eat for dinner, my brother’s preference is always given primacy over mine.

These examples illustrate that student–teachers have not only learnt to reflect on their gender identity, but they are also reshaping their understanding of a “gendered being.” This engagement seems to have provided them with alternatives to change existing patterns of gender inequality. Many argue that the BElEd course has enabled them to take initiatives at two levels: self and society. For one student–teacher, the course has helped her question her views on gendered upbringing. She narrated how she challenged her family and broke free from the gender mould. She discussed how she appropriated freedom through learning what went wrong in her upbringing and what needed to be changed.

The student–teachers also acknowledge that components of citizenship education are scattered in the BElEd curriculum. Both theory as well as practicum courses help to create an understanding of critical citizenship. The student–teachers shared with the researcher how workshops on “self-development” and “theatre” initiated them into a process of self-reflection and self-critique. They expressed how they first situated and identified themselves in their personal contexts and then tried to understand forms of knowledge and cultural assumptions embedded in cultural and political contexts around them.

Opportunities for fieldwork and engaged learning: The student–teachers were asked to reflect on how specific courses enabled them to undertake fieldwork both as individuals and as teacher practitioners. The DEd student–teachers could identify one component of the curriculum, the “neighbourhood survey,” which provided them with opportunities to engage with the community. The BElEd programme on the other hand offers several opportunities to student–teachers to engage in fieldwork, wherein these experiences are intricately interwoven into the entire curriculum. The student–teachers from both the programmes then went on to elaborate what they did in these projects/fieldwork. Their responses have been analysed using Nieto’s (2000) framework of “engaged learning.” 

It is compulsory for all the students of the DEd programme to conduct the neighbourhood survey. A student–teacher has to visit a slum area in the vicinity of the school where they teach. The survey is conducted with the help of a close-ended questionnaire, designed to collect information about each household of that area. Every student–teacher is required to complete the assigned number of questionnaires. They are also expected to interact with people during the administration of the questionnaire.

Respondent 6: When we study a neighbourhood, we learn about the problems that local people face in their everyday lives. Only an educated person can educate others (slum dwellers) about how to deal with these problems.

Respondent 7: The idea is to make us aware and to make us see how people are living and surviving in these pathetic conditions. As a teacher, you don’t need to see a child
as Muslim or Hindu. Therefore, only after making slum visits, you learn the reality of what the children who come from diverse backgrounds face. If I had not done DEd and was sent to school right after my class 12th, I would have beaten these children.

What comes out explicitly through the responses is that most of the student–teachers show a sense of pity towards the people living in slums. A majority of them labelled the people from the slum as poor and destitute and looked upon them as objects who deserved sympathy. One of the student–teachers argued that since he was educated, he was in a better position to solve the problems of slum-dwellers.

Nieto (2000) suggests that one of the chief objectives of engaged learning is to acknowledge one’s privileges and stereotypes of those who are different from us. The analysis reveals that the student–teachers’ understanding of people from the slums reflects a stereotyping; even “deficit notions” about students coming from such “pathetic conditions.” For instance, one student–teacher said that the neighbourhood survey has enabled him to see how children’s backgrounds affect their learning. While the reflection suggests that student–teachers have indeed developed sensitivity towards their neighbourhood as they come to acknowledge the challenges faced by slum children, a closer scrutiny of their responses indicates that many would perhaps reaffirm the notion that these children are incapable of learning.

While the DEd student–teachers are exposed to circumstances of the less privileged through the “neighbourhood survey,” their experiences are not drawn upon to discuss issues of diversity, inclusion and exclusion during the course of theoretical engagement and reflections from the field. Though the DEd students feel that the less fortunate need to be sympathised with, they do not necessarily examine the factors responsible for their existing condition.

Opportunities for counter-socialisation: The BElEd curriculum offers a wide range of experiences that could be described as engaged learning. These experiences are intricately woven into the entire curriculum through practicum activities and inbuilt field-based units of study in the theory courses. Situated in colleges of liberal arts and sciences, the programme offers several opportunities to engage with diverse projects and work with communities. Several studies have shown that the engaged learning curriculum, which provides young people with the opportunity to reflect and situate these experiences within larger social, economic, and political contexts, are more effective than stand-alone community work projects (Dodd and Lilly 2000; Batra 2009; Akiba 2011).

Respondent 7: Compulsory practicums like interacting with children who come from three different socio-economic contexts—low socio-economic status, middle-class and upper class—give opportunities to understand realities. When we return from the field, we learn what makes someone different as well as unique from each other and why it is wrong to discriminate against anyone on the basis of his/her caste, class and religion. So, it becomes important to actually go and meet people from diverse backgrounds and communicate with them.

Respondent 5: Project work in the fourth year also gave me a chance to look at societal issues at a deeper level. The topic of my project was “Problems Faced by First Generational Learners.” What were the kinds of problems they faced in their daily lives?

Respondent 7: We went to visit a slum in the first year as part of the social science project. Inclusion of such visits indicate relevance when we go to school for practice teaching. Children from diverse backgrounds seek admission in government schools. They come from different castes, class and religion. I have witnessed them practising animosity and intolerance towards each other. So, if we really want to sensitise our children and deal with stereotypes, it becomes crucial that we first look at our own biases and deal with them in a right way.

The student–teachers shared how the “slum visit” in the first year and “observing children” in the second year of the programme provided them with an opportunity to interact with communities and people from neighbourhoods different from their own. This helped them understand and empathise with the realities of the less fortunate and less privileged in society. In their view, this insight prompted them to search deeper and to gather the courage to create transformative pedagogies for children from diverse backgrounds, especially the less advantaged.

Unlike the BElEd student–teachers who had the field experiences which offered them opportunities to interpret reality within varying theoretical and experiential frameworks, the space for critical self-reflection is not available in the curricular structure of the DEd programme. In terms of theoretical engagement as well as practicum, very little space is offered to these student–teachers to reflect on their own beliefs, prior knowledge and assumptions.

Engagement with conflict: Stardling (1984) argues that the success of the implementation of citizenship education depends, in part, on how prepared teachers are to take up issues of conflict in their classroom teaching. According to the student–teachers, the domains of conflicts “social as well as individual” are uncharted, unexplored and closed. Largely, schoolteachers refrain from entering such contested terrains.

The student–teachers of the DEd programme supported the argument that controversial issues should be dealt with in a class. However, most of them felt that the role of a teacher in the classroom is to maintain a neutral position in a conflict situation. For instance, one student–teacher believes that a teacher should not take up gender, class, and caste issues in her class. She should rather promote the idea of a pan-Indian identity. Once again, the idea of nation and national identity reigns supreme, and knowledge remains objective and unitary in nature.

Another student–teacher advocates the use of positive examples to discuss such issues. She gives the example of her institution where the enrolment of a large number of women student–teachers reflects on gender equality. During one such discussion, the issues of cultural rights, such as the practice of hijab, were brought in. Most student–teachers consider it to be a matter of private faith which should not be brought into public spaces such as schools.

Respondent 3: Yes, in an elementary classroom when a teacher is discussing issues around equality we should ignore any aspect related to gender, caste, religion, etc. We should rather instil a sense of belonging to one single nation. I will use moral education to counter the traditional and orthodox thinking that nurtures inequality.

Researcher (during the focus group discussion): You also have Muslim girls in your school. If they had asked, as in this classroom, whether girls have freedom to practise hijab as per their wish, what would you have said?

Respondent 1: I will ask them to talk to their family. If they don’t feel like wearing it, then they shouldn’t wear it.

Respondent 2 (in favour of hijab): Whatever is the system of a place, you should adjust yourself according to it.

Another student–teacher expressed that students bring their identity issues into the classroom, which should not be so. The discussion reflects that issues related to women are perceived as private in nature and should therefore remain outside the domain of public scrutiny. The majority of student–teachers believe that maintaining a neutral position is essential to deal with controversial issues. They believe that a teacher must be objective and should avoid any emotional engagement with such issues. The role of a teacher in such a context is perceived as that of a gatekeeper who keeps issues of conflict at bay and outside the space of education, thus reinforcing the popular belief that knowledge is neutral and value-free.

For the majority of student–teachers in the BElEd programme, the first step in teaching controversial issues is to recognise that controversies and contradictions are to be examined. They argue that discussions of controversial issues provide opportunities to learn. All student–teachers of the BElEd programme consider advancing their pupils’ capabilities through discussions as important. They feel that through discussion children can learn and explore the existence of various dimensions of an issue.

Respondent 3: Caste issues were more severe in schools. Students of Class IV made friends on the basis of caste. One day a girl even refused to sit with another girl calling her Chamar, saying that “I will not sit with her.” In yet another instance, a Hindu girl objected to Muslim children’s participation in Diwali celebrations in school. She said, “This girl is Muslim and she has no right to celebrate Diwali.” They learnt all this from their teachers who practise these caste, religion and gender-based discriminations. She would ask a Hindu child to stand and speak on the celebration of Diwali, a Muslim child on Eid. Why can’t they speak about each other’s festivals/celebration? Why does she have to make them learn by rote about festivals like Diwali and Eid? The entire school was decorated during Diwali. They even got stuff from their homes for decoration. Four days before Diwali, it was Eid. But no one even bothered to talk about it, forget about celebrations.

This time, I celebrated both the festivals in my class. You know who was the happiest among all? The Muslim children. It was for the first time that Eid was celebrated in school and they could happily talk about it. They even fought with their parents to get money for Diwali celebration. Besides, during routine classroom teaching, I also started making groups which had children from different castes and religions. This group work actually helped me to break caste and religion-based divides existing in the minds of my students.

One student–teacher argued that

a teacher has to deal with the children who come from diverse backgrounds. If we ourselves are not prepared to deal with such issues, how will we deal with the issues of conflict that children bring to the classroom?

This reflects a teacher’s ability to relate to the context of children and to acknowledge that diversity is not only a resource, but also a challenge for teachers. She also acknowledges that the education of teachers plays a critical role in developing such an understanding.

According to the student–teachers, the teacher-educators encourage them to discuss their experiences and perspectives regarding issues that matter to them both as individuals and as teachers. During one such session, a student–teacher raised the issue of “child abuse” faced by children in the school where she was teaching. During the discussion, she realised that it was a common phenomenon across schools where BElEd interns were teaching. A common concern motivated them to discuss this matter with their teacher-educators during reflection sessions. The teacher-educator facilitated a discussion on this issue, which generated conflict and required sensitive handling. This approach helped them develop a more informed understanding of the issues, while they also learnt to develop appropriate ways to deal with such issues in a school setting.

The pedagogy employed during these discussions is not teacher-centred, which often denies learners the opportunity to become co-partners in the construction of meaning. The teacher-educators try to challenge these student–teachers through discussions on various issues. In this manner, several beliefs and assumptions are challenged, allowing student–teachers to learn from conflict.


The analysis shows that both groups, BElEd and DEd student–teachers, view the construct of a citizen and their location within that construct in diverse ways. This study also highlights how teacher education programmes influence and shape the notions of citizenship harboured by young students learning to be teachers. The official and hidden curriculum of teacher education programmes helps in nurturing/influencing their conceptions of citizenship.

The aforementioned findings suggest that in the DEd programme, student–teachers do not get any space to engage deeply with stereotypes and notions they carry about several issues. As a result, they fall back on their own understanding to interpret the various realities they encounter and their role as citizens. Thus, their focus on nationalism and patriotism, which student–teachers had learnt as abstract concepts during school, is continued without critical reflection while they prepare to be teachers.

The BElEd programme, on the other hand, plays a pivotal role in developing student–teachers’ dispositions and their role in society as active participating citizens. Both theory and practicum courses provide student–teachers diverse critical experiences that prompt them to develop as critical citizens. The student–teachers argue that the BElEd experience has provided them space to reflect critically and to question their deeply embedded notions, beliefs, values, and ways of life, appropriated from their personal contexts. This engagement with their beliefs and notions empowers them to engage with realities in a manner that is both rational and socially sensitive. The findings reveal that teachers can indeed play a critical role in social transformation, provided they are acknowledged as epistemic communities who can be engaged to become critical citizens with a desire to intervene and transform.

This prompts us to view the education of teachers as a critical space for intervention and social change. This study makes a strong empirical case for taking the curriculum and pedagogic processes of preparing teachers seriously. It highlights that the need to develop a more active citizenry presents important challenges for the teaching profession. Teacher education programmes should underline an active engagement in public life, and dispositions and sensibilities for living in plural societies with a commitment to social cohesion and solidarity.


1 Students who are enrolled in teacher education programmes.

2 The BElEd is a four-year integrated professional degree programme for elementary teacher education, offered in select colleges of the University of Delhi since 1994 (Batra 2009).

3 The DEd programme is a two-year programme for elementary teacher education offered after higher secondary school (after Class 12) in the District Institutes of Education and Training (DIETs). In 2014, this programme was renamed Diploma in Elementary Education on the recommendation of the National Curriculum Framework for Teacher Education. As envisaged by the National Policy of Education 1986, DIETs were set up for elementary teacher education and support.

4 As 10 student–teachers from the DEd programme have participated in interviews and the focus group discussion, each respondent has been allotted a number for the purpose of coding.

5 As 10 student–teachers from the BElEd programme have participated during interviews and the focus group discussion, each respondent has been allotted a number for the purpose of coding.


Akiba, M (2011): “Identifying Program Characteristics for Preparing Pre-service Teachers for Diversity,” Teachers College Record, Vol 113, No 3, pp 658–97.

Banks, J A (2001): “Citizenship Education and Diversity: Implications for Teacher Education,” Journal of Teacher Education, Vol 52, No 1, pp 5–16.

Batra, Poonam (2005): “Voice and Agency of Teachers—Missing Link in National Curriculum Framework 2005,” Economic & Political Weekly, Vol 40, No 40, pp 4347–56.

Batra, P (2009): “Teacher Empowerment: The Education Entitlement—Social Transformation Traverse,” Contemporary Education Dialogue, Vol 6, No 2, pp 121–56.

Billig, M (1995): Banal Nationalism, Sage Publications.

Dodd, E L and D H Lilly (2000): “Learning with Communities: An Investigation of Community Service Learning in Teacher Education,” Action in Teacher Education, Vol 22, No 3, pp 77–85.

Kennedy, K J (2008): “Rethinking Teachers’ Pro–fessional Responsibilities: Towards a Civic Professionalism,” Citizenship Education, Vol 2, J Arthur and I Davies (eds), London: Sage Publications, pp 256–69.

Kymlicka, W and W Norman (1994): “Return of the Citizen: A Survey of Recent Work on Citizenship Theory,” Ethics, Vol 104, No 2, pp 352–81.

Nieto, S (2000): “Placing Equity Front and Center,” Journal of Teacher Education, Vol 51, No 3, pp 180–87.

Stardling, R (1984): “The Teaching of Controversial Issues: An Evaluation,” Educational Review, Vol 36, No 2, pp 121–29.

Updated On : 9th Oct, 2018


(-) Hide

EPW looks forward to your comments. Please note that comments are moderated as per our comments policy. They may take some time to appear. A comment, if suitable, may be selected for publication in the Letters pages of EPW.

Back to Top