Article YOUNG Conduit for Engagement? 26(2) 1–18 © 2017 SAGE Publications and School Curriculum and YOUNG Editorial Group SAGE Publications Youth Political Participation sagepub.in/home.nav DOI: 10.1177/1103308817711533 in Hong Kong http://you.sagepub.com Trevor Tsz-lok Lee1 Stephen Wing-kai Chiu2 Abstract Learning about political issues through the new core subject of Liberal Studies (LS) in senior secondary education in Hong Kong has become ‘socially problematic’ amid mounting concern of politicians and pundits who see a link between such learning and the recent waves of student protests. Using data from in-depth inter- views with senior secondary students in Hong Kong, we explore how politically dis- engaged and engaged youth experienced their LS learning and how they perceived and made sense of the relationship between LS learning and political participation or its absence. Our findings indicate that while there appear to be circumstances that give rise to diversified learning experiences, LS has little bearing on youth political participation or otherwise. Keywords Civic education, politicization, youth activism, liberal studies, Hong Kong Introduction There has been an underlying struggle in many Asian educational systems over attempts to depoliticize schools by designing civic education exclusively for incul- cating moral and cultural values (Lee, 2004; Murphy and Liu, 1998). Civic educa- tion in Hong Kong is no exception, but its peculiar historical and social contexts have shaped students’ conceptions of citizenship in distinctive ways (Kennedy et al., 2008; Tse, 2006). In the post-colonial era, Hong Kong’s education system has expe- rienced waves of significant reforms, including in the area of civic education, in order to meet emerging political and economic challenges at both the global and 1 Department of Sociology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong. 2 Department of Social Sciences, The Education University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong. Corresponding author: Trevor Tsz-lok Lee, Department of Sociology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong. E-mail: [email protected] 2 YOUNG 26(2) local levels (Morris et al., 2000; Tse, 2005). A main thrust of the recent education reforms is the introduction of Liberal Studies (LS), on top of Chinese language, English language and Mathematics, as a new core subject under the senior secondary education since 2009. This reform is especially important as LS becomes a compul- sory subject of the only public examination—the Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education examination—at the end of secondary education. Its examination results are used as part of university entrance requirements. In a sense, LS serves the function of civic education in that it ‘aims to broaden students’ knowledge base and enhance their social awareness through the study of a wide range of issues’ (CDC and HKEAA, 2007: 1). While Western democratic societies tend to grapple with questions about the educational effects on generational civic decline and citizen apathy (Galston, 2001), public attention in Hong Kong is directed towards a different agenda. Learning about a wide array of topical political and controversial issues through LS has become ‘socially problematic’ amid mount- ing concern of pro-establishment politicians and pundits who see a link between such learning and an upsurge in student protests in recent years. The outbreak of large-scale protests in late 2014, often referred to as the ‘Umbrella Movement’, fuelled further controversy. Thus far, however, little empirical evidence exists to support or refute the widespread perception of LS as an essential ingredient in trans- forming students into actively engaged participants in politics. This article draws on a qualitative analysis of data regarding how young people perceive the politicizing effect of LS in order to explore the ways that the curriculum and pedagogy of LS influence students to engage and disengage from politics.1 With such evidence, we may be in a better position to reframe overall discussion about inherent tensions in the post-colonial policy of civic education, and the sources of youth political participation in a specific local context where the depoliticized edu- cation system and deeply rooted examination-oriented culture coincide with the emergence of vibrant civil society. Civic Education and Youth Political Engagement Adolescence is a critical period when youth develop their civic and political iden- tities, and education plays a key role in developing youth’s notion of citizenship and their orientation to political participation (Erikson, 1994; Levine and Lopez, 2004). School-based civic education imparts to young people the knowledge, skills, attitudes and resources necessary to understand democratic principles and participate in normative politics (Fraillon et al., 2012; Galston, 2001, 2003; Niemi and Junn, 1998; Torney-Purta, 2002). The level of students’ citizenship participa- tion can also be effectively mediated through school curricula, pedagogical cli- mates and extra-curricular activities, among other types of civic education (see, e.g., Geboers et al., 2013, for a synoptic review). In the cross-national analysis of 38 countries, Lin (2014) found that civic knowledge was positively correlated with students’ perceptions of classroom openness to discussion on social and political issues. Classroom climates for discussion allow students to acquire not only civic and political knowledge but also interactive skills and critical thinking skills, which are deemed as the core skills of citizenship (Campbell, 2008; Hess and McAvoy, 2013; Torney-Purta, 2002). Lee and Chiu 3 In some cases, however, school learning may be negatively associated with youth political participation. For instance, political distrust and inefficacy have been found to be stronger among students than non-students (Niemi and Klingler, 2012). Civic education, with its political literacy component, might undermine students’ sense of political efficacy in that students may conceive of political decision-making as requiring technical knowledge, and, thus, the lack of ‘technical’ expertize becomes the justification for their low degree of political participation (Condor and Gibson, 2007). In addition, Lopes et al. (2009) longitudinal study demonstrates that while civic education equips students with political knowledge, students’ decisions on whether to take part in or opt out of political activities may depend on their indi- vidual cost–benefit estimates. In recent years, however, there has been an increasing concern that political par- ticipation should not be ‘narrowly’ defined only as acts of participation in normative politics (e.g., voting, affiliation with a political party, campaigning) (Lam, 2004; Manning and Edwards, 2013; Verba et al., 1995). Indeed, a plethora of youth studies shows that youth political engagement in the twenty-first century is no longer con- fined to electoral politics nor a normative conception of polarity between apathetic and activist youth (Fisher, 2012; Harris et al., 2010). The emergence of identity politics, ‘life politics’, and New Social Movements influence youth to pursue indi- vidualized and everyday forms of political engagement such as donating money, signing a petition, boycotting, protesting via the Internet, everyday practices to a cause, attending a cultural event with political content and participating in a legal protest (Delli Carpini, 2000; Theocharis, 2012; van Zoonen et al., 2010). Notably, Manning and Edwards (2013, 2014) found little association between civic education and normative political participation but when the scope of analysis was extended to address diverse modes of youth political expression, civic education became highly relevant. Campbell (2008) contends that an open classroom climate is likely to be associated with students’ disapproval towards unconventional acts of political participation. However, Ehman’s (1980) study shows that despite its posi- tive effect on developing political trust and interest, open classroom climates may lead students to have a decreased sense of political efficacy yet an increased degree of political skepticism, as in-class discussion on controversial issues may reveal inadequate and failed government responses to the public’s demands. Students’ exposure to the adult-centred world through community service engagement may also stimulate critical reflection on compliance with adult norms (Youniss et al., 1999). In his study of active youth organizations in Hong Kong and Singapore, Han (2015) found that, in contrast to the didactic approach in schools, an alternative, non-formal citizenship education occurred between the members of those organiza- tions and the wider youth community, especially through the internet, which in turn fostered active youth citizenship in both societies. Taken together, there is a complicated process underlying how and why young people are engaged or disengaged from political activities. In this process, a school curriculum plays a role of enhancing political knowledge. It can either foster politi- cal participation or lead to political distrust and inefficacy, which, in turn, allows one to make a conscious decision to become disengaged from politics. Relatedly, an open classroom climate is also salient in bringing students together to discuss and debate political and civic-related topics. This is to some extent in line with the concept of ‘community of practice’ proposed by Wenger (1998). Classroom climates 4 YOUNG