CR&DALL Deputy Director Leping Mou attended the recent Democrat project conference in Barcelona (20-21 November), where former Director Prof Mike Osborne acted as the conference Rapporteur. The conference was an immense success, bringing together leading figures from European democracy as well as academics and practitioners in the space of Education for Democract and Civic Engagement. Mike has kindly shared his conference report which we publish below.

European and National policy: Future of Democracy and Education for Democracy

Barcelona, 20/21 November 2025

Closing Remarks of Conference Rapporteur, Michael Osborne, University of Glasgow

 

The conference began with welcome speeches from representatives of the University of Barcelona and the municipal government. The opening keynote from Ivan Grdešić, Dean at Libertas International University, former Croatian Ambassador to USA and UK focussed on the topic of Education with Democracy in Crisis. Ivan’s presentation had three foci:

• the importance of political science in understanding what democracy in education is, and how democracy in education can be applied
• how democracy dies - we heard about the many natural and social crises that contribute to the death of democracy
• And how education can help in times of crisis

Some of the key quotes from Ivan’s speech were ‘education as a gatekeeper’ for democracy, and something but he took from the work of John Dewey, ‘education as a midwife of democracy’. I’m reminded that John Dewey's seminal work, Education and Democracy, which dates back to 1916 speaks about education as not simply being the communication of knowledge, but the sharing of experience so that children can be integrated into the democratic community. Dewey of course was one of the first proponents of learning through experience, which is core to a lot of thinking in my field of adult education.

Ivan spoke about a number of challenges that education can help us overcome. Education can act against the incremental changes in legislation that corrode democracy. Education can teach norms and roles without which our lives would be illegitimate and immoral. He stressed two particular norms: tolerance and institutional restraint. He also talked about democracy being a learned practise with three dimensions. Firstly, there is a cognitive dimension which covers areas such as critical thinking, literacy, history and ethics. Secondly there is a social dimension which encompasses dialogue and empathy, and thirdly there is a dimension which is institutional.

He also mentioned the importance of acting democratically in everyday life, so-called ‘tin cup actions’, such as speaking to someone on the bus rather than ignoring them. Later in the conference the ideas of the AECED project, which spoke about micro spaces where democracy is practised, resonated with this notion. Other key issues raised were those of misinformation where objective facts don’t matter, and the neutral curriculum which fears to offend. In relation to the latter, there seems to me to be a danger of playing into the hands of right-wing populism if in education we become too prescriptive in what we can legitimately speak about.

One particular response to the keynote is worthy of highlighting. It is that from Katarina Popovic from Serbia who argued that some of us live in hybrid democracies that seemingly have the structures of democracy in place, but in reality, these structures do not work. It reminds me that the same could be said for some universities as Peter Fleming so cogently argues in his book, Dark Academia – How Universities Die.

The three projects from the Horizon Europe Democracy in Education call that presented at the conference were Democrat (the host) and two sister projects from the Horizon Europe Democracy call, AECED and the Critical Change Labs projects. These projects had several commonalities regarding principles in research which included:

• Putting participants at the centre of the research process with the focus on knowledge co-construction and co-creation, participatory approaches and the creation of living labs;
• An intention to provide tools for teachers and this was particularly the case in the Democrat project. The competence framework which this project has created around solidarity, deliberation, critical judgement and democratic resilience reminds me somewhat of lifelong learning competencies that highlight metacognition, self-directedness, information skills and social entrepreneurship.

The use of arts-based approaches was emphasised in AECED and the Critical Changes Labs, and overall, we could see both micro and micro perspectives presented in the projects.

The first panel included participants from each project with two key questions were posed to panellists: what had they learned during the day and what impacts the projects had had.

It was suggested in the panel that the work of the projects was applied and non-traditional. I would argue that suggesting that the work is outside the mainstream does the projects a disservice. In fact, participatory research and know co-construction has a long-standing history, particularly within adult and community education where multiple organisations such as the UNESCO Chair in Community Based Research and Social Responsibility in Higher Education, Participatory Research in Asia, members of the Talloires Network and the PASCAL Observatory, amongst others, having used such approaches for decades.

It was argued that ‘youth is the future of democracy’. Of course, young people are important, but as we live longer lives all generations are important. Parents and families are key as is intergenerational learning. So too is inter-sectoral learning. We heard a lot about schools, which of course are important, but they are part of a learning ecosystem that includes a multitude of other formal and non-formal organisations offering learning opportunities as well as much informal learning. I would argue for the importance of connecting learning to place as in learning city initiatives, and to focus on small places, learning neighbourhoods as in the case of work of PASCAL, where it might be easier to foment change. Democrat uses the term ‘Agora’ for its virtual spaces. It maybe that in our search for democracy through education, we need to create real public spaces in localities for discussion.

As regards impact on policies, it is important to generate robust research-informed evidence. That being said evidence may not be enough since decision-making will not always be rational. However, without solid evidence there is little hope of change. An important point was made in discussion that alternative ways of pressuring policymakers might be considered if evidence is ignored, not acted upon or diluted in application. It is clear that the three projects have the opportunity to develop and sharpen approaches to impact and think about concrete pathways that have a reasonable chance of success in doing so.

Further it should be recognised that most of formal educational provision is delivered locally by municipalities albeit often directed nationally. Many municipalities throughout Europe have very tight budget constraints. It is therefore inevitable that economic arguments for benefit must be provided by researchers.

The second keynote presentation came from Anja Neundorf, University of Glasgow, and she reported the activities of her European Research Council grant, How education can save democracy. She raised questions such as how do dictators persuade populations that they are living in a democracy and how can we internalise the spirit of democracy in both leaders and citizens. She reported on two studies: firstly, the long-term impact of school education on democracy and secondly on how democracy commit strength and beyond school. In the first study she provided very good evidence that ‘school matters’ using large-scale secondary analysis of longitudinal data on indoctrination in the curriculum across 160 countries. Key points that emerged from her presentation were that teaching the values of democratic institutions, political rights, critical thinking and pluralism, in other words the precepts of democracy, are key to developing democratic societies. Also, she made it clear that there is evidence that growing up in a dictatorship leads individuals to have less democratic values, for example looking towards the ‘strong leader’. In the second study she focused on life beyond school and adult focused civic education. An important point internationally has been the reduction of foreign aid in wealthy countries to the global South, and the concomitant risks of this policy change to developing democracies. I reflect myself on the declines in international aid within the UK, and their consequences[1].

Thinking about the importance of participation of learning, I wonder whether the democratic act of being a learner in adulthood, irrespective of what is learnt (i.e. it doesn’t have to be about democracy), leads to greater civic engagement and the development of democratic values. It is perhaps not a co-incidence that some of the most democratic societies in the Nordic countries have the greatest participation in adult learning, and with considerable state support. There also seems to be an important space for universities to promote democracy given that in many countries they have the freedom to act independently of the state.

A further session focussed on Democrat’s Democracy Toolbox, an extensive pan-Europe collection of resources for teachers and pupils. Several thoughts arise. How will be resource be sustained once the project has been completed? How will the resources be updated and made contemporary over time?  How might some of the resources be developed into materials that are less static so as to appeal to young people who experience so many very sophisticated materials through social media?

The second and final panel featured inputs from speakers representing the European Commission, the Council of Europe, the Government of Catalonia and Katarina Popovic from Serbia. We heard from the EC plans to publish guidelines for competencies in democracy education, and their concerns about the integrity of education, electoral spaces, and resilience and civic engagement. The Council of Europe put its emphasis on digital citizenship education. Katarina began her remarks with the sobering thought that she did not know when she goes home whether she might be Minister of Education or whether she might be arrested! As an adult educator she appealed for educators to focus learning materials on real problems from life.

All in all this was a rich conference attended by some 200+ delegates, and the organisers must be congratulated on their organisation of the event.