Developing citizenship skills through cultural heritage and social networks

Developing citizenship skills through cultural heritage and social networks The project, consistent with the orientation of the National Operational Programme, For School - Competences and Learning Environments (2014-2020) of the Ministry of Education, Universities and Research - aimed at form competent and responsible citizens in a modern, connected and interdependent society - is intended to: - developing a feeling of belonging to a broad, democratic and inclusive community, starting from an interdependence of political, economic, environmental, social and cultural dimensions, between local and global levels (Balibar, 2012); - in-depth exploration of citizenship education in an intercultural perspective, with a specific focus on heritage education (Bortolotti, Calidoni, Mascheroni, & Mattozzi 2008) in connection with a more aware use of digital tools and social networks. The project involved 5th-6th grade classes of the IC Alessandrini and IC Da Vinci in Cesano Boscone (Milan) to work on continuity between the different school levels; it has been monitored and evaluated using the participatory and “fourth generation” evaluation approach (Guba & Lincoln, 1989), aimed at enhancing the subjectivity of the participants, activating a reflexive comparison between them and providing useful evidence for the redesigning of similar actions. In this context we will focus on students’ activities analysis, carried out according to the qualitative method of content analysis (Krippendorff, 2004) with a coding system inspired by the constructivist approach of Grounded Theory (Charmaz, 2006). In a first phase, labels adhered to the text, following an analytical process of “naming” the data (Tarozzi, 2008, p. 84) and then grouped into categories representing the different identified units of meaning. A key aspect of the process has been intersubjectivity between the researchers who, coding the texts first separately then comparing each other, have been gradually redefining the coding system. Working within an ecological paradigm (Mortari, 2007), the purpose was to give an account of the phenomenon's complexity and to “preserve the other's words speaking” (Mortari, 2010, p. 25). Main successful factors relate to an initial participatory and shared, between teachers and trainers, design of the path proposed to the classes, based on a context needs analysis (Nigris, Balconi & Zecca, 2019) to address socially vivid matters (Legardez, 2007) within the schools’ social environment. Moreover, the students were involved in the ongoing activities redesign from a bottom-up perspective, with the intent of building a shared collective identity and promote a sense of responsibility towards the territory's memory and heritage. Coordination meetings between teachers and trainers were held to plan, analyse and share results of classroom activities with students. As the teachers’ focus group analysis highlighted, the project also supported the teachers' professional development, mainly reflexivity about their own teaching practice, class management and listening skills, inclusion and teamwork. Linking heritage knowledge, protection and education on an aware use of social networks was the challenge, accompanied by a strong transdisciplinary approach. The activities (Table 1) were carried out using the cooperative-learning methodology, which also supported the development of relational skills. The students, actively involved and protagonists in their learning process, chose which heritage (tangible and intangible) had to be valued and shared in order to maintain an anchorage in their sensitivities, and communicated it through a variety of languages (art, music, theatre, videotelling, storytelling...). Trainers and teachers continuously recalibrated their actions according to the emerging issues; the products created were then shared on Facebook with the aim of disseminating their content and meaning within a wider community. Finally, addressing students from different cultural backgrounds, the project approaches heritage from an intercultural perspective, enhancing their own culture and traditions and putting them in dialogue with others. First activity: what is cultural heritage? After viewing a series of images, the students, divided into two groups, are asked to define what the photos presented have in common. Discussion and agreement on a first definition of heritage. Second activity: our heritage Students were asked to add a photo/image on a Padlet or bring in an item that would represent their own heritage. Discussion and sharing of ideas and emotions. Third activity: what are social networks and how do we use them? Group discussion about knowledge and use of social networks. Structuring an interview to conduct with parents. Fourth activity: what we want to share? Review of parents’ interviews and reflection on what the class wants to share on social network. Group work to choose topics and languages. Fifth activity: digital content creation Viewing the work done and discussing dissemination methods and strategies. Creation of a Facebook group shared by the two schools. (Posting content through parents and teachers’ profiles). Table 1 Scheme summarising students’ activities The project has promoted transversal citizenship skills in the pupils involved, and in particular:  students’ digital skills through the acquisition of awareness about digital tools and media typical potential and risks;  intercultural competences;  responsibility towards a shared heritage;  interpersonal skills;  acquisition of disciplinary knowledge. The perception of the project’s educational impact shows a coherent relationship between the objectives that guided the design work and the learning outcomes that emerge from the analysis of the classroom activities. The first identified learning outcome is a sense of responsibility towards a common heritage ("I learnt what heritage is, you think it is just a painting but it is much more than that and it belongs to everyone" - 5th grade; " I think we also learnt how to take care of heritage and how to protect it" - 6th grade). A second outcome is a greater awareness of the potential and risks of the digital environment ("I learned the importance of privacy" - 6th grade; "I learned that you have to use social networks with caution" - 6th grade; "[I learned] what it means to be responsible using social networks, you can't just write whatever pops into your head" - 5th grade). A third point underlined by the students is the ability to interact in a group, understanding different points of view, valuing one's own and others' skills, contributing to common learning and implementing collective activities ("Friendship includes all diversities" - 5th grade; "I’ve learned new things about my classmates, their origins"; "I’ve learned to work together and we shared desires" - 6th grade). The fourth topic is about the link with their hometown, Cesano Boscone ("At the homework space in winter it was nice because from the windows you could see the snow and some days they sold roasted chestnuts, we bought them and ate them together" - 6th grade). Students mentioned their beloved places of gathering using past times, revealing how the perception of pandemic measures has marked a strong detachment in their experience. To ensure interactivity, we will build a dynamic and effective presentation using tools such as Genially or Canva, which enable to include not only texts and images, but also resources, interactive elements, smartblocks and/or infographics. In order to allow active participation and immediate involvement, participants will be asked to answer questions and express their opinion through the use of agile tools such as Wooclap or Mentimeter. References Balibar, É. (2012). Cittadinanza. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri. Bortolotti A., Calidoni M., Mascheroni S., Mattozzi I. (2008). Per l’educazione al patrimonio culturale. 22 tesi. Milano: Franco Angeli. Charmaz, K. (2016). The Power of Constructivist Grounded Theory for Critical Inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 23(1), 34–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800416657105 Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (2 nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.31.3460 Legardez, A. (2017). Propositions Pour une Modélisation des Processus de Didactisation sur des Questions Socialement Vives. Sisyphus, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.25749/sis.11936 Mortari, L. (2007). Cultura della ricerca e pedagogia. Prospettive epistemologiche. Roma: Carocci. Mortari, L. (Ed.). (2010). Dire la pratica. La cultura del fare scuola. Milano: Bruno Mondadori. Nigris, E., Balconi, B., & Zecca, L. (Eds.). (2019). Dalla progettazione alla valutazione didattica. Progettare documentare e monitorare. Milano: Pearson. Tarozzi, M. (2008). Che cos’è la grounded theory. Roma: Carocci.