Hello, everyone.

My name is Ms. Wyatt.

And I'm so pleased that you could be here today for our Citizenship lesson.

Welcome to today's lesson on do all tools for challenging injustice work for all campaigns, from the unit what tools can we use to challenge injustice in our communities? By the end of today's lesson, you will be able to explain the difference between direct and indirect action, and explain how tools to tackle injustice are chosen.

We will be using the following keywords throughout today's lesson, and these are direct action and indirect action.

Direct action is immediate, visible activities aimed at addressing specific issues, whereas indirect action involves influencing others and using existing systems to bring about change over time.

Some of these words may be new to you today or you're not familiar with them, but please don't worry as we will be using them throughout our lesson.

So our lesson on do all tools for challenging injustice work for all campaigns is broken up into two parts, with the first part exploring what is direct and indirect action, and then looking at how our tools to tackle injustice is chosen.

So when you're ready, let's begin the first part of today's lesson.

Every campaign requires tools to make change happen.

Sam says, "Petitions and protests." Alex says, "Strikes and social media." Sofia says, "Lobbying and boycotts." So campaign tools can be put into two categories, direct action and indirect action, our keywords.

So Laura says, "Direct action is immediate and visible, like protests." So it happens then and there.

Izzy says, "Indirect action relies on existing systems and influencing others to create change over time, like petitions." So let's check our understanding now then.

Are these campaign methods that I will read out to you direct action or indirect action? So we have boycott, social media, posters, public speech, march, and strike.

So pause the video and think which one do they fit under, direct or indirect action.

Okay, it's time for our answers.

So boycott, we should have said direct.

Social media, indirect 'cause it can happen over time and it uses existing methods.

Posters, indirect.

Public speech, indirect.

March, direct.

And strike, direct.

So well done if you got those correct.

Direct action can be non-violent or violent activities targeting people, groups, or property.

So Sam says, "A boycott is an example of a non-violent direct action." So it doesn't involve violence.

Whereas Alex says, "Rioting is an example of violent direct action," because it causes harm and destruction.

So again, are these direct actions of strike, march, arson, protest, and damaging property non-violent or violent? Pause the video and make your decisions.

Okay, well done, everyone.

So our answers should look like, strike is non-violent, a march is non-violent, arson is violent, protesting is non-violent, and damaging property is violent.

So I'm hoping you're starting to see the difference between the violent and the non-violent direct actions.

Why would campaigners choose non-violent direct action then? Let's think about this for a second.

Well, Alex says it raises awareness without causing harm.

But can we think of any other reasons why might a campaigner choose non-violent direct action over violent direct action? Okay, well, Lucas says it gains public sympathy and support.

Sam says it shows peaceful resistance to injustice.

And Jacob says it maintains moral authority.

So it's not causing any harm.

Why might campaigners though be tempted to choose violent direct action? Well, Alex says it shows urgency or frustration when peaceful methods are ignored.

But can we think of any other reasons? Well, Jun says it disrupts systems quickly to force a reaction.

Sam says it draws media attention, so you'll see it on the news.

And Jacob says it expresses anger over serious injustice.

So indirect action is different from direct action because it works behind the scenes to influence change, rather than taking immediate or visible action.

Laura says, "For example, campaigners can lobby their MP or other parliamentary officials, or give evidence to a select committee." So we have this question, why might campaigners choose indirect action? Well, Sofia says, "To raise awareness by reaching a wide audience." Can we think of any other reasons why else may a campaigner choose indirect action? Well, we might have said what Jun said, and to influence decision-makers.

Sam says it's more likely to be safe and legal, so you're not worrying about getting into any trouble.

Jacob says, "To build long-term support." So most campaigns will use both direct and indirect action, whether the issue is local, national, or global.

So Laura says, "This is because both types have strengths that work together to create change." And Sofia says, "Using both means campaigns can raise awareness and influence decision-makers at the same time.

So let's think.

We have this scenario, it's a local scenario, and the issue is that they need to fix the broken traffic lights near school.

So would this be an example of direct or indirect action? Well, it's an urgent issue and needs a quick fix from the local council.

Direct action would be the most effective, such as a peaceful protest to draw immediate attention.

Okay, this one then, we're gonna have a go at this one ourselves.

So direct or indirect action.

The level is again at local, and the issue is to stop the council turning the local park into a car park.

So what would be best here, direct or indirect? Hopefully we've said it could use both direct and indirect action, such as a peaceful protest, and a petition to show local support, and to put pressure on the council to rethink the plan.

Okay, next one, Scenario 3.

The level is national now, so it's gone beyond local.

And the issue is to lower the voting age to 16.

So they could use indirect action like petitions, lobbying MPs, or using social media as that would be the most effective because it would raise awareness and pressure the parliament to consider a law change.

Now you try.

So the level is national.

The issue is to improve mental health support in UK schools.

So which methods are going to be the most effective here, direct or indirect action? Well, we said both types of action could be used, like pupil-led awareness events to highlight the issue publicly.

Lobbying MPs and launching a petition could influence education policy and funding decisions over time.

Okay, Scenario 5, the level is now global, and it's to stop fast fashion exploitation.

So both direct and indirect action could be used here.

A boycott would target specific companies, while online campaigns and lobbying would pressure policymakers and brands long-term.

Now it's time for you to try.

We have Scenario 6, the level is global, and the issue is to end child labour in supply chains.

So what would be the most effective action that could be used here? Okay, both types of action would be effective.

Global protests and boycotts would put pressure on companies.

So petitions would create long-term change.

For this task, we would like you to discuss with a partner what direct action and indirect action are.

In your discussion, please make sure to consider what the definition of direct and indirect action are and why they're used and at least one example for each one.

So when you're ready, pause the video and have a go at this task.

Okay, everyone, so your discussions might have included some of the following points that I'll read out.

So direct action is immediate and visible action taken to create change, such as protests, strikes, or boycotts, which can be either non-violent, like boycotts, or violent, like riots.

Campaigners might choose non-violent direct action to raise awareness without causing harm and gain public sympathy, while some may be tempted by violent direct action when peaceful methods are ignored as it disrupts systems quickly.

Indirect action works behind the scenes to influence change over time using existing systems such as petitions or lobbying MPs, and is chosen because it can reach wide audiences, influence decision-makers safely, and build long-term support.

Most successful campaigns use both actions as direct action raises immediate public attention, while indirect action creates lasting change through laws and policies.

So good job on having this discussion with your partner.

We have now looked at direct and indirect action, and now it's time to explore how are tools to tackle injustice chosen.

Injustice is when something's not fair or right, especially when someone's rights are violated.

There are four key points to consider before identifying tools to challenge injustice.

Firstly, what is the issue? Secondly, what level is the injustice? Next, who holds the power? And then fourth, what resources are available? So these are our four key points that we need to think about before choosing the tools to challenge injustice.

Sam says, "Being clear on the exact issue makes the campaign more focused and persuasive." For example, unfair access to mental health support is too broad an issue to tackle in just one campaign.

It's too large.

Alex says, "Refining the injustice, for example, the long waiting list for school counsellors in deprived areas, is clearer and easier to tackle.

Alex says, "The level of issue identifies where to take action." So which level would these issues be, global, local, or national? So you've got three issues.

Pause the video, read through these issues, and decide whether they would be global, local, or national.

Okay, time for our answers.

The first issue was some clothing brands use factories where workers are unpaid and work in unsafe conditions.

So this is an issue that happens beyond the UK, so this would be global.

Number two, a council closes a youth centre in a low income area, leaving young people without support.

Well, it's referring to a council in a low-income area, so this is referring to local.

And then the government delays disability benefit payments, affecting vulnerable people across the country within the UK.

So that means it is national.

Well done if you managed to identify the level of issue.

Sam says, "Identifying who holds decision-making power helps focus the campaign." So who holds the power to fix unfair school uniform rules? Do you know? Well, Sofia says, "The headteacher and the school governors hold the power to change unfair school uniform rules." Campaigners need to think about what resources they have or have access to, for example, media access.

But what other resources may need to be considered? Well, Aisha says people who's involved, the time that's gonna be spent on it, the money, information, and community networks.

In 2020, footballer Marcus Rashford launched a successful Free School Meals campaign which extended food provision during school holidays.

The campaign identified four key points before deciding on which tools to use.

So the issue was that children were missing out on meals during school holidays due to living in poverty.

The level of this was national because it was across the UK.

The power was held by the UK Government in England.

And the resources that they had were social media and Marcus Rashford's public profile.

The tools used were all indirect actions, such as an open letter, a petition, media interviews, social media, and sharing his personal story.

So why do you think Marcus Rashford used the tools that he did? Well, Sofia says, "Marcus Rashford used the tools like social media and an open letter because they helped him reach lots of people quickly and pressure the Government." And Jacob says, "Sharing his personal story made the issue more powerful and gained public support." The Kill the Bill campaign was a widespread protest movement in the UK that aimed to stop the Police, Crime, Sentencing and the Courts Bill, which was introduced in 2021.

Critics argued that the bill posed significant threats to civil liberties, including the right to protest.

The movement gained momentum through demonstrations across various cities, like London, Bristol, and Manchester.

The Kill the Bill campaign, which ultimately did not succeed, sought to prevent the proposed bill from becoming law.

So the issue was that the law limited people's right to protest peacefully.

The level was national.

The power was held within the UK Government, England and Wales only.

And the resources that people had was social media.

Both direct and indirect tools were used, such as protests, marches, and petitions.

So why do you think the protest and marches were used as tools for the Kill the Bill campaign? Why do we think? Laura says, "The campaign used protests and marches to show public disagreement in the way it was trying to protect." So for this task, we need to fill in the missing words.

We have a few gaps.

So pause the video, read through the sentences, and try and work out what these missing words are.

Okay, let's read through it together.

So campaigners choose tools to tackle injustice by thinking about the issue, the level, who holds the power to make the change, and the resources they have available.

They might use direct action, like a protest, or indirect action, like lobbying MPs.

So well done if you managed to identify the missing words correctly.

True or false, campaigns can use any tools.

Is that true or is it false? Hopefully we've all said this is false.

It's false because different campaigns need different tools depending on the issue, depending on the level, depending on the power and the resources.

So what works for one campaign might not work for another.

For this task, we need to evaluate the factors that influence how campaigners respond to injustice.

So within this, we need to include what injustice is, the four key points to consider before choosing tools, an example of a campaign, and the action it chose to take.

So when you're ready, pause the video and have a good go at this task.

Okay, well done, everybody.

So your answer might include some of the following.

So injustice is when people are treated unfairly or their rights are ignored.

Before deciding on which tools to use to tackle injustice, campaigners need to think about four key points, the issue, who has power to change it, the level, is it local, national, or global, and what resources they have available.

For example, the Kill the Bill campaign identified these points clearly.

The issue was opposition to propose legislation about the rights to protest.

The level was national.

The power lay with the UK Government to change laws in England and Wales.

And the campaign chose both direct and indirect actions, such as social media campaigns, protests, marches, and petitions.

These tools were effective because they helped reach a wide audience, build public support, and put pressure on the Government.

So you might have chose the same example as us, but hopefully we identified the four key points to identify before tackling injustice and what injustice is.

Alternatively, your answer might look like this one.

So injustice is when people are treated unfairly or their rights are ignored.

Before deciding on which tools to use to tackle injustice, campaigners need to think about four key points, the issue, who has the power to change it, the level, and what resources they have available.

For example, Marcus Ashford's Free School Meals campaign identified these points clearly.

The issue was children missing out on meals during school holidays due to poverty.

The level was national.

The power lay with the UK Government.

And his resources included social media following and his public profile.

He chose indirect actions such as open letter, using social media campaigns, and sharing his story.

These tools were effective because they helped him reach a wide audience, build public sympathy, and put pressure on the Government.

His campaign succeeded, demonstrating how chosen tools tackle injustice.

We have now come to the end of our lesson on do all tools for challenging injustice work for all campaigns.

And I'm gonna summarise it for us.

So direct action involves visible steps, like protests or strikes.

Indirect action includes methods such as petition, social media, and lobbying.

Tools to tackle injustice must be chosen based on the issue, who has the power to change it, the level, and available resources.

For example, Marcus Rashford used indirect actions like writing an open letter and sharing a story online to successfully campaign for free school meals in school holidays.

The Kill the Bill campaign used both direct and indirect actions such as protests, marches, and petitions.

However, not all tools work for every campaign.

Choosing the right approach is essential for success.

So I hope you've enjoyed today's lesson.

Thank you so much for your efforts throughout.

And I hope to see you in the next one.