DE LA COMERCIALIZACIÓN Y DEL TRANSPORTE DE LA CARNE Y SUS DERIVADOS

Although fierce debate on the necessity of national identity education continues, the enthusiasm for promoting national identity within school settings can be observed in both Western and Eastern contexts (Almonte, 2003; Christou, 2007; Durrani & Dunne, 2010; Merry, 2009; Parmenter, 1999).

Broadly speaking, there is a consensus that national identity can be displayed explicitly and implicitly (Grosvenor, 1999). School curriculum, which is “inherently ideological and political” and reveals who holds the power in a given society (Apple, 1990, vii), has enormous power to impart messages concerning national identity to students. Curriculum textbooks, which define legitimate knowledge and desirable social attributes (Bromley, 2009), are regarded as a key site where individuals sharing a common national identity can be created (Hardwick et al., 2010; Lee & Misco, 2014; Merry, 2009; Sneider, 2013; Tormey, 2006). Furthermore, there is an agreement that national identity can be invoked through some specific areas of curriculum, including civic education (Hardwick et al., 2010), moral education (Almonte, 2003) and history education (Vickers & Jones, 2005). The teaching of history is especially regarded as a key factor. School education has placed a great emphasis on consolidating the bond between individuals and their nation through the creation of a shared memory (Christou, 2007; Sneider, 2013). In addition to formal curriculum, scholars extend their visions of education to consider how national identity could be advanced implicitly. Research indicates that rituals and ceremonies (Christou, 2007), routines and symbolic events of everyday schooling (Grosvenor, 1999), as well as the singing of national anthems (Abril, 2012; Guerrini, 2013), are all important means through which national identity could be formed. Furthermore, teachers’ perceptions of national identity are likely to exert an influence on students’ attitudes (Chong, 2013; Van Peer, 2006).

Based on the claim that national identity could be advanced through multiple sources, many empirical studies have been conducted to explore how national identity is designed, implemented and attained in various educational contexts. Although both quantitative and qualitative approaches have been adopted, the latter occupies the mainstream.

The focus has been placed on understanding the written intentions through analysing curriculum policies and textbooks in various national contexts. Employing quantitative or qualitative approaches, most studies have explored how curriculum statements and textbooks display national identity in a single national context, either focusing on narrative styles or the frequency of references to national identity (Almonte, 2003; Durrani & Dunne, 2010; Lee & Misco, 2014; Merry, 2009; Tormey, 2006). A small number of studies have been conducted in comparative contexts (Hardwick et al., 2010; Sneider, 2013). By and large, most documents that have been analysed are related to history education, which is too narrow a focus to reveal a complete picture of official standpoints. Additionally, the voices of policy makers are rarely explored to triangulate the findings drawn from written documents.

Some studies have been designed to explore the voices of head teachers and teachers. Interviews provide room for respondents to express their opinions, and hence interviews are the most commonly used instrument to generate data within the field. A number of studies employing interviews are designed to explore how teachers perceive and teach national identity in practice, as well as to determine what they think ideal national identity education should look like. Teachers’ perceptions are understood to have influences on their pedagogical preferences, and thus are explored first through questions like “How do you perceive the meanings of national identity?”(Chong, 2013, p.245); “What do you think patriotism is?”(Nash, 2005, p.219); “How do teachers construct national identity and patriotism?” (Yuen & Byram, 2007, p.23); and “How do principals and teachers perceive national identity education?” (Arar & Ibrahim, 2016, p.682). To understand practical issues regarding national identity education, scholars are guided by the questions including “How do teachers present and respond to patriotic ideas and sentiments in the classroom?”(Hand & Pearce, 2009, p.459);

“Which motives encourage or hinder the school principals from dealing with education for national identity for the school’s students?” (Arar & Ibrahim, 2016, p.682); “How do the principals and teachers cope with the conflicting expectations of the different stakeholders concerning education for national identity?”(Arar & Ibrahim, 2016, p.682); and “What are the educational activities that help the school to reinforce their students’ national identity?” (Arar & Ibrahim, 2016, p.682). In addition, observations of national celebrations and other related activities are employed to investigate how national identity is conveyed in hidden curricula (Christou, 2007). Generally, practitioners’ responses are various. Some of them recognise the role of school education in advancing students’ national identity (Jaskulowski et al., 2018), while others treat it critically, arguing that patriotism and national identity are taught or should be taught as controversial issues with no appeals to the students’ emotions (Hand & Pearce, 2009; Yuen & Byram, 2007).

To understand the results of national identity education, questionnaires, interviews and focus groups have been employed to explore students’ voices, either regarding the education they have experienced in schools or their perceptions of national identity. To avoid students’ non-comprehension, some entertaining activities have been employed, such as asking them to draw images of things that represent the nation (Durrani & Dunne, 2010). Studies of similar themes have been conducted in different contexts (Christou, 2007; Hand & Pearce, 2011; Kahne & Middaugh, 2007; Parmenter, 1999), involving students with various attitudes towards national identity education. Some students express strong sentiments towards their nations, while others take indifferent attitudes and argue that schools should remain neutral on the issue of national identity.

Overall, even though previous studies contribute to the description of national identity education by taking different stakeholders’ opinions into consideration, the extent to which official intentions and enacted curriculum are compatible with each other remains unclear.